tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12669850402902426632017-08-17T15:44:22.497-04:00ExChristian.NetThe ExChristian.Net blog exists for the express purpose of encouraging those who have decided to leave religion behind. It is not an open challenge for Christians to avenge what they perceive as an offense against their religious beliefs.webmdavenoreply@blogger.comBlogger883125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-40081845276780090012017-08-06T15:36:00.000-04:002017-08-13T17:35:44.300-04:00Honesty and Adages<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-a4nkfoWh0vM/WYdvT1jrVII/AAAAAAAALEI/PVAxe6nkSnogiHFRzhN7LNyy7ryGqNrEgCLcBGAs/s1600/childhood-emotional-baggage.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="183" data-original-width="275" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-a4nkfoWh0vM/WYdvT1jrVII/AAAAAAAALEI/PVAxe6nkSnogiHFRzhN7LNyy7ryGqNrEgCLcBGAs/s1600/childhood-emotional-baggage.jpg" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">W</span>e all bring our childhood experiences baggage with us as we navigate our lives. We can spend the remainder of our lives separating the who am I really from what we were taught; those influences we accepted but now think about often. And we can run into not only obstacles, but illumination, in the process.<br /><br />Sometimes I find myself in a situation, quoting something my parents said pertaining to it. Secretly, I catch myself wondering why. I have to remember their experiences were interpreted differently in their days, with their information, from mine. Then I think: They would have tried to understand “where I'm coming from.” I remember my mother accepted not only my oldest brother's homosexuality without being judgmental, but his atheism after returning from the Pacific WWII battles, and then his eventual entrance into monasticism. I think my parents wouldn't be shocked at all by the revelations of pedophile priest cover-ups. Even back in the 60's my mother asked, “Why should I ask a priest's advice about my married life? What do they know what it is to be married?”<br /><br />My parents were pleasantly but not fervently Catholic. They seemed to accept their inherited Catholic faith as true, but they didn't push it on us. Following their parents' traditions, religious dogmatic teaching was left up to the nuns. Maybe this could be thought of as a wall of separation between church and home. I appreciate that. But maybe their policy had something to do with separating themselves from the strict religiously driven attitude of their own parents: children should be punished, should be seen and not heard. Their parents used corporeal punishment to restrict their “natural-born sinfulness.” I think my parents concluded that would have been as destructive to their children as it had been to them.<br /><br />Long before the 60's phrase “Let it all hang out” became common, my parents and grandparents were practicing it. They grew up in tough times and minced no words in being outspoken. That's why, when I met my first wife, I was unprepared for her Protestant inheritance of pretentious kindness to your face, yet knocking or mocking you behind your back. My family was open about liking or avoiding you, leaving judgments simmer until they knew you better. What you saw of us is what you got. I like that. If you don't like it, then consider my father's recommendation to get that feeling “off your chest,” and we can have a debate about it. Of course, he was usually drunk when he said that, but it's workable. I'm an obvious atheist who is tolerated, not confronted. Why is that? Are believers “protecting me by being kind” to me, or are they being kind to themselves, with that attitude? Maybe they think I have an audacious chip on my shoulder. I'm sure they don't want to find out. My parents would defend me, anyhow. So, there.<br /><br />In the tradition of my parents and grandparents, here's some honest talk. Hopefully, it will bring to the sunshine of truth things you hadn't thought about.<br /><br />My grandparents came over from Old Europe on boats. They had it rough before they left and after they arrived, and no time or energy for nonsense. They called it as they saw it: if you cheated them in the butcher shop or humiliated their kids, you'd hear about it. So what if they brought over their baggage of prejudices about Jews and black people. Their children eroded those away over the decades. When they talked about someone who “missed the boat.” it meant more than merely missing a physical connection; it was the feeling of being left behind without opportunity for a new life. My mother used to say that about people who didn't accept the obvious. She didn't have my info to make my observation: those kids raised in fundamentalist home-school homes have “missed the boat.” They're left standing at the dock while the other kids have been sailing on the boats of public education, discovering and extensively exploring the real world. Left stranded at the pier, those young fundie people aren't ready for the real world when they enter it by public high school or college.<br /><br />My mother would use the phrase “Where was he when the brains were handed out? Or “He doesn't have the brain he was born with.” I often get to wondering along the same lines. Where did that person's mind go to when it left behind his or her own natural-born curiosity and thinking potential? Do some people decide to miss the boat deliberately? Then there's my outspoken, eccentric aunt, my mother's sister. She's the one who said, “Nobody's going to tell me not to put my bananas in the refrigerator,” and she didn't, and they turned black. But they still tasted all right. Aunt Rose would say, “Either shit or get off the pot.” I think she would have told the J.W.'s and Mormons the same thing, if she had time for them. Definitely, the apologists. (Being a mother, she might have forgiven them, though. If they truly love God, they have to continually make excuses for his acts. It's what Stalin’s mother would have done for him.) It's the way I feel whenever I read their writings. (Even my wife will comment, after listening to some guru on TV speaking of above-human-understanding-matters, “what a bunch of hogwash.”)<br /><br />Speaking of “on the pot” - St. Paul said Jesus arrived in the “fullness of time,” when it was the foolish-est of time. Now's the time. Jesus should arrive ASAP, and when he's killed (as a blasphemer in the Middle East, naturally), his body can be authenticated by forensic examiners, proving his alleged “resurrection” is a con, his body having been found in its burial place after the confessions of his disciples. Now is the fullness of time to prove claims in; not some ignorant superstitious past. I guess that's why faith = hearsay, though.<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">Something else I'm waiting for: an actual miracle.</span>Something else I'm waiting for: an actual miracle. My wife just got back from a week recovering in the hospital. She really suffered from a massive infection. A few days after she came home, her pastor brought us a stew, enough for the next three day's suppers. Very nice. He also brought the well wishes of himself and the congregation. Of course, he prayed over her. When he did, he might have seen me ready to break into laughter; maybe he caught the sarcasm in my smile. He knows as well as I do, but he's counting on the love I have for my wife for my silence. I was disappointed, though. She wasn't immediately cured, leaping about. Didn't his Jesus tell him, “greater works than I do, you will do?” Didn't he cure the bind and crippled on the spot? Looks like Jesus is still “on the pot” along with his clergy on that, after more than two thousand years. “Put your money where your mouth is,” Jesus.<br /><br />So here are a few of those old sayings and adages I remember. Each generation creates its own, including yours. Maybe these examples will help you excavate past ones of your own and re-evaluate them. When doing this, ask yourself if they, though part of your growing-up, really express yourself, your honesty and experiences. You do have access to information your ancestors could never have predicted, and the ability to create sayings to honestly describe it.<br /><br />Well, the only ones left from my immediate family are my “kid” brother, 75, and me. We still carry on some unspeakably honest traditions. In conclusion, I think he'd like this one: It's easy to understand why the Holy Spirit can be a flame, a dove, and a wind. After all, Dracula can morph from an undead state to become a bat or a vapor. They're both fictional. (On the other hand, mom and dad wouldn't appreciate that one. It shows he and I have made progress, though. Neither did our grandparents figure the religious baggage they brought with them would be discarded by us. It's what the freedom they sought included. webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-54323674374040511882017-07-23T11:41:00.000-04:002017-08-06T19:02:48.627-04:00Penis<a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1266985040290242663" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"></a><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=1266985040290242663" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"></a><i>By Carl S ~ <br /></i><br /><i><br /></i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-FvbZ264LxiA/WXTDeWQp1oI/AAAAAAAALB8/TIP98bnci_AEycSW9Ev4t_OZE9eIiICmwCLcBGAs/s1600/penis-god.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="292" data-original-width="403" height="231" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-FvbZ264LxiA/WXTDeWQp1oI/AAAAAAAALB8/TIP98bnci_AEycSW9Ev4t_OZE9eIiICmwCLcBGAs/s320/penis-god.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">N</span>o, you have not mistakenly accessed a porn or medical site. You're on the right site. We're here to deal with the penis as it applies to religion. The spokesmen for major religions have pushed their rules about sexual behavior on humankind for centuries, with wretched excess. They are obsessed with sexuality. And the penis has a lot to do with this. You wouldn't think so, because they're always projecting the “spiritual” at the public; that's a facade of denial to themselves as well as their unaware audiences.<br /><br />Their problem and the problems they cause others, are based on a simple fact of nature: Male penises involuntarily react to the presence of desirable women (or for some, men, but this author will focus on heterosexual relationships), with the beginning of erections. Looking at a nude or semi-nude female can have the same effect. Religions have turned this simple reaction into a moral battleground. One Saudi cleric “explained why their women had to be tented-over: men would not be able to restrain themselves from molesting them. A famous condemnation from Jesus is that a man merely looking at a woman with lust has committed adultery. He also urged, if a man's bodily part “offends” him, he should chop it off. Women have been damned for having “power, “over men. They've been tortured and/or killed by men who believed not having control over their penises was a sign of moral weakness. Women have been blamed for “being in league with the devil” by “tempting” men to abandon their virtue. How did a physical good feeling become perverted into an evil? Who would have imagined an all-natural erection would become an indicator of immorality?<br /><br />As a consequence of both philosophical and religious beliefs in the body being at war with the “spirit,” the spiritual came to mean a superior state of being to be sought at all costs, and men have suffered by default by giving in to spontaneous sexual feelings. The mind at war with body credo, promoted solely by “wise” men, is in bed with the wisdom of God, i.e., foolishness to the nature of humans. This causes damaging and unnecessary suffering for men and women. Doesn’t this have something to do with “God” being a male, and males have a penis? What if this god has no control over his penis, he himself wants none, and who dares to say 'no' to him? This god is Omni-Potent and, it is asserted, other attributes follow, such as omni-wise, omni-knowing, omni-merciful, etc. As if having a penis alone automatically confers such attributes. The one-with-the-penis creates everything, rules, dominates, and can screw his creations if he desires; and does.<br /><br />Without the penis, where would the Abrahamic religions be, where would those “spiritual” goals to self-perfection be, without erections to war against and control? Without a penis, the male god could not penetrate a virgin (ask her, she was there alone, take her word for it). The Catholic Church alone would be without a Feast of the Immaculate Conception, a Feast of the Annunciation, and Christmas, if God wasn't able to penetrate her through the best-option method he himself created. Without a penis, how could an Islamic man benefit from virgins at his disposal in Paradise?<br /><br />Not all organisms procreate as humans do. And even the penis bedecked reps of their male god are accepting in-vitro fertilization. Supposing men didn't have penises; wouldn’t there be equality between the sexes, since each would resemble the other while retaining their sex drives and deep need for intimacy? There is no present answer to that question. How quickly would the fights over abortion rights come to a conclusion if men could become pregnant? If men menstruated, would they tolerate rejection for being “unclean?” Without penises involved, millions of boys, for centuries, wouldn't have believed masturbation to be immoral and shameful, or that spilling their seed is a defilement of their bodies, the “temples of the Holy Spirit!” Without a penis, men would not have been flagellating and starving themselves in quests for “spiritual purity bound to physical purity,” nor would they urge others to follow in their paths.<br /><br />Without penises, there would be no power to rape, there would be no advantage to kidnapping virgins, nor could rape be used as a weapon of war, where it causes the victim to be killed by her own family because her “defilement” has “dishonored” them. No children could be penetrated for a priest's pleasure.<br /><br />Without a penis-god, how differently would/will humanity be regarded? Exposing the deeply hidden roots of the insistent penis domination is a fear: women have power to remind men, through sexual intercourse, that they are animals and mortal. Even the man-gods are threatened by this reality. Because sexual relationships have the effect of diminishing male escape from feelings of immortality and superiority, the male god has set strictures (through male authorities), whereby woman is to be obedient to man. Male god sides with the males made in his image, of course, and demands women be held in check, and “know their place.” He dictates a woman's purpose in life is to be a companion and comfort to a man, to procreate his children. Note: As recently as February 2017, an Oklahoma legislator said “I understand they (pregnant women) feel like that is their body..., what I call them is, you're a host.” If his male-dominated law is passed, a pregnant woman will lose the right to decide for her own body.<br />The man's godly duty is to use her to make babies. That's not all. To paraphrase St. Paul: Blessed are those who have sexual relations to procreate, but more blessed are those who have no sex at all.<br /><br />Scriptures never mention men being “unclean,” only women and certain animals, like pigs. Cleanliness was a big thing with really big time dirty and smelly nomadic desert tribes. A time in the pond was heavenly. Cleanliness became an obsession; cleanliness of body, thoughts, and spirit. Women in menstrual periods were “unclean;” face it, obsessed with cleanliness, what god or man wants to put his penis in an unclean place? And then they got cleansed in the River Jordan by baptism, etc. (“Cleanliness is next to godliness,” after all.) This got carried over to extremes like “bathed in the blood of the Lamb,” (icky!), which washes away sins and guilt. More damned primitive purification rituals. Children are brainwashed through indoctrination, protected from sex, kept “innocent” until marriage.<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">Scriptures never mention men being “unclean,” only women and certain animals, like pigs.</span>Compare these religious traditions with sexuality in all its expressions: “Dirty” pictures, erotic and pornographic “filth.” Erotica is exotica. Dirty homosexual love. A dirty mind. What's morally wrong with even imagining you and a loving other sharing one of the best things in life together? You may feel so dirty, reading about pedophile clergy that you need a good long shower to feel right again, but there's nothing dirty about cuddling after sex. Ignore those purity-prudes; if sex is dirty and messy, so? A lot of pleasures are. Those in the throes of sexual intimacy are “as happy as pigs in mud.”<br /><br />(Note: If you want to have a few good laughs, read the sermons of St. Bernard of Clairvaux ( 1090 – 1153), on the bible's “Song of Songs,” a. k. a., “The Song of Solomon.” He interprets those erotic verses as a theological spiritual relationship!)<br /><br />Finally: reject all the male penis gods. Let's be equals and enjoy pleasuring each other the way freely equal humans can. Keep that male god in his heaven. Maybe he envies us, and our sexuality is a god he wants us not to worship over him. He and his absent-of-sex-drive, repressed or hidden sexuality representatives should abandon their ancient fears. That would mean emasculating their god, wouldn't it? Time to rip the loincloth off the crucified S. and M. savior. Maybe it’s covering an erection?webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-65809833733857147682017-07-04T08:04:00.001-04:002017-08-06T15:48:16.423-04:00 Died For My Boring Trivial Sins?<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-w2T70JNapOY/WVuEScNTnzI/AAAAAAAALAw/yEPf_-ZqciECy6CofM6xHUmeILcMNnOkgCLcBGAs/s1600/guilt.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="395" data-original-width="458" height="275" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-w2T70JNapOY/WVuEScNTnzI/AAAAAAAALAw/yEPf_-ZqciECy6CofM6xHUmeILcMNnOkgCLcBGAs/s320/guilt.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">M</span>aybe you've had my experience. I attended elementary school, and one day the teacher found a note calling him some kind of a pig. Since nobody (naturally) owned up to writing it, the class was told to stay after class, to ferret out the writer. Now, the strange thing was: I personally felt guilty for that note, even though I knew nothing about it; so guilty that, right after class, I went straight home, a mile's walk away. My mother got a phone call asking where I was. She told them I was home and asked why they called. Now, we've all heard the saying, “If you're innocent, you have nothing to be afraid of,” but I didn't believe it then and I don't believe it now. She brought out that adage. Now, most parents would send the child back to face the music. Not my mom. She asked, “Did you write it?” I told her. “No, and I'm not going back.” She believed me and backed me up. Later on, the perpetrator confessed. But 70 years later, I still wonder: why did I feel guilty for something I didn't do? And in the years since then I've wondered why innocent people walk into police stations and confess to murders they couldn't have possibly committed, since the available evidence contradicts their claims.<br /><br />This enigma came to mind again while reading a James Agee book, “The Night Watch,” a novel about a 12 yr. old boy who, with his buddies, spends the entire Thursday night into Good Friday morning in a chapel, in a “vigil,” praying and thinking about what he has been indoctrinated to believe. Many of his “God-offending” thoughts he counters with repentant prayers; but at other times he has to admit that, in spite of what he has been told is wrong, he sees no point in feeling guilty about them. Since I spent a few intermittent years between Catholic and public schools, I'm familiar with the emphasis on guilt in parochial education. And I suspect all s.o.p. religious childhood “educating” follows the same guilt saturation to one degree or another. Not only do I see this approach as damaging (for sensitive kids), but worthless when the child starts growing up and realizes there is no god around to punish the guilty. My observations of Christian behavior lead me to conclude they don't feel guilty about many of their actions, especially cheating.<br /><br />It was only after I left school when a priest told me “Jesus died for you.” I was supposed to feel grateful for this. Was I also supposed to feel guilty? Had I missed something while I was in public school instead of parochial, something about “you're personally guilty for his death because you've sinned?” (I'd even forgotten all about the thing where every human is guilty at birth!) Now, true believers may swear on a stack of bibles this is the way things are, God-wise. But, they put their emphasis on being “not perfect but forgiven,” and go on their merry way. Guilt is a serious matter to me; not easily brushed aside so blithely. I seriously try to make decisions I won't require feeling guilty about. Sure, being human means making mistakes, like wrong and stupid decisions. And it's easier to say to some disembodied fantasy-god figure or his unaffected agent, “forgive me, Lord,” rather than apologize to the person you've hurt or damaged. Those human to human guilty feelings I can accept. They’re real.<br /><br />But don't attempt to tell me or try to indoctrinate my children into accepting guilt because you say a god came out of the skies to die for their “sins.” I've heard the story invented by a man who invented his own sacrificial man-god/original sin creed out of his own imagination - a man who couldn't even form a physical relationship with a woman. The “historical Jesus,“ he knew nothing of. That Jesus was executed because of his blasphemy and opposition to religious authorities, not for redemption. (He couldn't even redeem himself.) Paul's imaginary creation who died for you, for mankind, because of an imaginary sin scenario, deserves a reality-check eraser, a laser-blade burning away that carbuncle. Feel no guilt at the demise of this guilt. webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-16114268111717587012017-07-04T07:33:00.002-04:002017-07-23T12:34:25.502-04:00The Blessings of Being a Christian When There is No God<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-H89EjDewO1c/WVt9D9PQytI/AAAAAAAALAc/sm9tb0wdYdIxKAOLUMzd3fbeUT9YGQ9DwCLcBGAs/s1600/birdsborn.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="360" data-original-width="600" height="192" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-H89EjDewO1c/WVt9D9PQytI/AAAAAAAALAc/sm9tb0wdYdIxKAOLUMzd3fbeUT9YGQ9DwCLcBGAs/s320/birdsborn.png" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">T</span>hose blessed by being raised in Christian communities don't have to go through the trouble of choosing a faith. The “faith of our fathers” (and mothers) has been handed down to them, surviving tyrannies and persecuting monarchies, though we don't talk about how the faith supported those tyrants and monarchs. This “one true” religion has adapted. It's a blessing God has denied to Islam.<br /><br />The most popular word for Christians is “blessed.” They will say, “Bless you” whether you're up or down; even when they believe you're damned to perdition. They'll tell each other if you have a peaceful death, that's a “bless-ed” one, but if it's obvious your death will be in agony, then assuredly you will be “all the more blessed in heaven.” If you're a true believer, you have an automatic insurance plan to eternal life – provided you keep up the payments. Christians consider themselves blessed because they've been “saved, chosen, and given access to the Truth.” For this reason, it's a blessing they don’t have to be bothered with searching for truth or answers to the big questions of mortality, evil and suffering in the world, etc. If they do, the church leaders are available to allay fears and doubts.<br /><br />Now, that ”blessed forgiveness of God for original sin” they talk about, is akin to this: telling Native Americans: “You resisted our advancements and fought against us. You should be grateful we left you any land at all.”<br /><br />If you were born into and raised in a Christian community, you ought to be aware of its blessings. It's set up to keep you comforted, comfortable, controllable, and compliant. (Two out of four of those you’d have anyhow, if you were born without religion). The same goes for an Islamic community or a cult commune. If you obey, you're a real “blessing” for everyone. Don't take my word for it. Ask around. Just stay on that “straight and narrow path” and get rewarded. We're all in this together; it's how God works. When it comes time to vote, the decisions are made for you. Vote for Christians only, vote pro-choice, (Let those women die from back-alley abortions. They deserve it), and choose against all “progressives.” How easy it is.<br /><br />Being part of a Christian community is being among those who cannot clearly explain their most cherished beliefs. They presume to think you’re one of them, so they speak in insider code phrases they haven't thought about. Believers assume you understand “You know,” and “I feel in my heart,” and “I believe,” to be adequate answers to your queries. It's as if they're saying, “Well - We know, you know?” In an odd way, that's supposed to be a blessing, too.<br /><br />Some “outsiders” are blessed in joining a church community, but not until then. Benefits for them may mean financial help, trips to the grocery and clinic. This might include help with the kids, if the parent doesn't mind them being indoctrinated. Those benefits may not be available, or have been exhausted, from other places. All you have to do is claim to believe. It may not be easy, but it's survival. And one more member is welcome, even one who tokenly supports the flimsy structure of belief. After all, it isn't “God” helping, it's, as always, humans, who tell themselves God has sent those in need to them.<br /><br />“Blessings” fall under the heading of comfort. Faith gives comfort, assurance, by “being of one mind with Christ,” as St. Paul conjectured. So let's everyone get out the Casino of Prayers of their choice. Religion is a business. Like a fast-food enterprise, it has to keep upgrading the menus to attract new customers and keep the regulars coming back. It creates environments of praise to God via entertainment. All the more praise if guitars and keyboards and drums fill the air, amplified by state-of-the-art audio equipment. Shout out the doubt. What does it cost? Thousands? Millions? It's all for the glory of God! You can't spend too much for that, and he'll reward you a hundredfold for your sacrifice.<br /><br />But wait, I ask. Shouldn't those expenditures be used for the poor, the severely depressed homeless, those who struggle to feed their children, those having to choose between food and prescriptions? What about them? The answer I perceive is this: the Lord is not blessing them as he has us; it must be their fault. They must not truly, truly, believe in Jesus. Rewards on earth, and even prosperity, will come to those who truly follow his commandments. It is written. But - isn't that Old Testament God stuff? I say, who rewards the upright in the here and now, and does just the opposite for the bad people? Even then, the psalmist constantly bitched because the bad guys were prospering while he, the upright one, had a miserable existence. But no, this is the recent good news Christianity: rewards on Earth, plus “many mansions” rewards in heaven. (Reasons why Mormons are included as Christians.) You and yours and the church community are the Chosen people. Sounds greedy to me. Is this what it's come to?<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">Believers assume you understand “You know,” and “I feel in my heart,” and “I believe,” to be adequate answers to your queries. It's as if they're saying, “Well - We know, you know?”</span>Chisel away at the very ornate plaster facade and plaster saints of faith and you'll find the faithful within curled up like chipmunks against the cold world outside. The comfort of faith depends on defying the cold realities of the world. But the comfortable in faith don't want to leave the rest of us alone. They try to force, through uprooting humane laws, societies they consider un-Godlike. They want everyone to share the blessings of faith, even if they have to be forced on them, The “fun in fundamentalism” becomes “danger and damage” whenever and wherever it damns individuality.<br /><br />Christians will parrot the phrase, “There's a hole in you, and it has to be filled with God.” Maybe they're revealing their own feared emptiness. What if the “hole” they fear is all about fear to be alone with oneself? What if “community” is their response to solitude, to an unconfronted fear of what they'll find in that quiet? Is the self a hell to be avoided? Think about it from where they're coming from: if for your entire life you've been taught you're essentially bad, then self-discovery must mean confronting the worst in yourself, right? That's some scary shit.<br /><br />For me, solitude is very welcome, healthy, necessary for the mind and sanity. Individuality is very important, and individuality is explored and exposed in solitude. (Be careful, though. At the age of 18, I took a trip over a hundred miles with an expectation of readmission to a religious community. I was told, “You're lying to yourself.” Having to non-verbally agree, I went back, but learned a lesson on the way. It wasn't as if I traveled thousands of miles to seek wisdom from a guru or Zen master, but it worked. I try to be aware of, and to reject, lying to myself.)<br /><br />What a pity it would be to arrive in senior years to find you haven't understood or even known yourself because you didn't take time out to do so!<br /><br />So - Where is “God” in “Christianity?” As it is, there's no god there; only humans. Unless “God” just happens to be an Indivisible Dealer of “blessings.” Send in your money. Now.webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-4970373268998654372017-06-25T15:50:00.002-04:002017-07-04T08:06:45.885-04:00Not the Creation of an Intelligent Designer<i>By MTC ~ </i><br /><br /><i>This post has some inspiration by this article from the <a href="http://faithlessfeminist.com/uncategorized/every-woman-knows-body-not-creation-intelligent-designer/">Faithless Feminist</a>.</i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ioJCkgr3Wb8/WVAT8wjC7KI/AAAAAAAAK8k/SExyk10m7JMxtCqSXaL9DyFx7g9dtZ0HgCLcBGAs/s1600/breasts.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="488" data-original-width="366" height="320" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ioJCkgr3Wb8/WVAT8wjC7KI/AAAAAAAAK8k/SExyk10m7JMxtCqSXaL9DyFx7g9dtZ0HgCLcBGAs/s320/breasts.jpg" width="239" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">A</span>s mentioned, menstruation is not the work of a so-called "intelligent designer." Besides being able to have kids, periods serve no use whatsoever. Not to mention they get in the way of things. If "God" is so all-knowing as well as understanding and caring, he would've come up with a much more convenient and simple way for women to be able to have kids.<br /><br />The article also mentions that breast size doesn't matter when it comes to lactation. Which reminds me, why are humans the only creatures where the female always has bigger breasts even if she's not pregnant or nursing? According to Biblical Gender roles, "God" also intended for a woman's chest to bring comfort and pleasure to a man. He wired men to be attracted to women's breasts, and curvy hips as well. So in other words, women were intentionally created to be sex objects. To heck with that! Just like periods, breasts and curves are also inconvenient and get in the way of things. If "God" is so wise, caring, and understanding, why couldn't he come up with a way for females to feed babies in a way that is not intrusive on our own bodies (no offense intended toward women who have breastfed or are currently doing so)? Or an overall more convenient and simple way to feed babies. Think about it, if a woman dies during childbirth and there isn't a lactating woman around, how will the baby get nourishment? Or what if she has HIV or some other disease, and breastfeeding would ultimately endanger the health and life of the baby? Again, no offense intended toward anybody.<br /><br />Biblical Gender Roles also says that "God" purposely created women to be physically weaker than men so that they would be in need of man's protection. That means he wanted women to be weak and helpless. Screw that too! The average physical strength difference between men and women is not the work of an intelligent designer either. For one thing, it puts women at a huge disadvantage for many things. There's no doubt in my mind that it's the main reason why women have been discriminated against and thought of as inferior throughout history. What if a woman is in a situation where more brawn would be helpful, but alas there's not a man around to help her out? If a husband dies while protecting his wife (i.e. putting women and children in lifeboats first on the Titanic) then how will she be protected as well as provided for? Not meaning to sound like a man-hater, but if men are to protect and take care of women then why do we even need to be protected in the first place? I hope that makes sense. LOL <br /><br />Like I said, I'm not a man-hater despite some of my venting. Which reminds me, the way "God" supposedly designed us can also be a disadvantage toward males. For example, there is plenty of awareness about violence toward women. We're all too familiar with how some husbands and boyfriends batter and abuse the women they're supposed to love and care about. But we rarely hear about a man who's battered and abused by his wife or girlfriend. It does happen, it just isn't spoken about. If a male victim reports it he'll be scoffed and told to "be a man" and stand up for himself. Unfortunately, if he were to do just that and fight back against the female perpetrator then he would be the one labeled an a-hole. webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-54331362243300037932017-06-14T10:36:00.001-04:002017-07-04T08:06:45.892-04:00The Magnet<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BDZ5BHGfeGY/WUFJ14ITBcI/AAAAAAAAK70/hZ9-ISPiAaAyZwV9hCloMJf9VXFA8gPGwCLcBGAs/s1600/problem.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="249" data-original-width="532" height="149" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BDZ5BHGfeGY/WUFJ14ITBcI/AAAAAAAAK70/hZ9-ISPiAaAyZwV9hCloMJf9VXFA8gPGwCLcBGAs/s320/problem.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">I</span>n case you haven't noticed, people who are abducted by aliens, or have a past life as royals, or have after-death experiences, or have been instructed by their voices to perform certain acts, or know that the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Bureau_of_Investigation" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Federal Bureau of Investigation">FBI</a> and <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Central Intelligence Agency">CIA</a> are listening to their phone calls and following them, or are being persecuted for their <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Holocaust denial">Holocaust denials</a>, all have one thing in common: they really believe they're special. If they didn't, it logically follows, for one thing, those powers wouldn't care about them. If they join with groups of others with the same “experiences,” they are even more convinced. These people might think of themselves as heroes or daredevils for enduring such trials. But you can't convince them out of their “knowledge,” as they have reached their conclusions from their experiences. It's all in their heads.<br /><br />One of the many reasons individuals are attracted to religions is that of being chosen to receive access to special knowledge of the mysteries of life and the meaning of everything. For many people, this is one huge irresistible magnet. What follows always requires initiations, rituals, and leaving reasoning and questioning behind as impediments to this knowledge. This is why they are always called “mysteries of faith.” In this way, they resemble the (non-religious) practice of <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestalt_therapy" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Gestalt therapy">Gestalt therapy</a>, which aims to, “let go of your mind and come to your senses.” The difference is that the “spiritual” experiences are entirely feelings. All religions and cults aim to have each person feel convinced what has been “revealed” through the “mysteries” to eventually become indistinguishable from feelings of being special, and that they're all one needs to know everything. Another attraction: One can become smug in knowing the Truth, and pity those who don't or are resistant to it.<br /><br />It's interesting, this magnet of privileged access to divinity, occult knowledge, the meaning of and explanations for everything, and having the comfort of giving up on rational thinking in exchange for them. There's something familiar about this. We already know of three major religions with a <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_of_Eden" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Garden of Eden">Garden of Eden</a> myth, where an “explanation” is given for all the misfortunes on Earth: they are the result of humans giving in to the temptation to acquire special knowledge of good and evil available from only one source. Yet, this is exactly what religions use to allure curious seekers into their webs.<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">One of the many reasons individuals are attracted to religions is that of being chosen to receive access to special knowledge of the mysteries of life and the meaning of everything. </span>Aren't those who choose to believe just day trippers, taking the easy way out? Suspending judgement or rejecting evidence to the contrary is just the opposite of searching for the truth. It's saying that because everyone around you says something is true, that automatically makes it so, and you needn't go any further. So the social feelings determine what's true or not, what everyone must take for granted.<br /><br />No one wants to be ordinary; while many need reassurances they aren't. Those individuals want to believe the thoughts and feelings they have, have always been superior to those of ordinary people, and religions authenticate them in ways they haven't been able to. This also makes them part of a special group who understand and reinforce those feelings. Having privileged access to any of the Mysteries: of God, Allah, <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybele" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Cybele">Cybele</a>, <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithraism" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Mithraism">Mithras</a>, <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Gnosticism">Gnosticism</a>, the <a class="zem_slink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosicrucianism" rel="wikipedia" target="_blank" title="Rosicrucianism">Rosicrucians</a>, fundamentalism, astrology, numerology, etc., etc., is a powerful magnetic draw. Becoming a member of the 144 thousand saved, or inheritor of one's own planet, means one is “chosen.” All cultish beliefs have been and are comforting to their believers. The deepest faith begins like an introduction to a radio or television set. It's initially a diversion or entertainment, but then it becomes a necessity, a substitute for dealing with the real world, even an addiction. Fundamentalists are a type of couch potato.<br /><br />Maybe explanations for religion aren't hard to understand after all. Research for evidence takes effort. It's just too easy for most people to believe than to search for the facts. But then, if they did, they'd find out they're not all that special; only finding the facts is special. Finding the evidence is a magnet of its own.webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-11782147684193577432017-06-06T04:35:00.001-04:002017-07-04T08:06:45.877-04:00Why Not Try Atheism?<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-EzTlEmSKvk0/WTZpT4rKgAI/AAAAAAAAK44/G4nX-BfnhYIs5t2HwbDce9LIaM4I_jAbgCLcB/s1600/schulson-atheism-tease.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1068" data-original-width="1600" height="214" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-EzTlEmSKvk0/WTZpT4rKgAI/AAAAAAAAK44/G4nX-BfnhYIs5t2HwbDce9LIaM4I_jAbgCLcB/s320/schulson-atheism-tease.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">M</span>any are raised in Catholicism and become Evangelicals or Episcopalians or whatever. Some in other sects came to “accept Jesus” while most are merely warm to him. Others of various sects became convinced and/or rabid Christians; most remain moderate. (I knew a man who changed from Lutheran to Christian Scientist to Methodist, and he was still in his 50's.) One Supreme Court judge described “Experience and Feeling as the Ultimate Ground of the Christian faith.” That's it? Wow. Doesn't that description fit every religion, and even schizophrenia?<br /><br />Many people switch sects just like they switch jobs. Many believers toy with astrology, Buddhism, dogmatic patchwork-faith-combinations, exotic methods of mindfulness, etc. What about you, what else is there? Why not try atheism? Go ahead and live a secret life for awhile. Does the thought scare you? Apparently, pedophile priests, their supporters, and leading clergy of any religions aren't scared of being punished by their God, and they claim to be privy to his thoughts. Even if you're confused about or bored with Christianity, get out of the rut. You're in for an adventure.<br /><br />Maybe you hadn't thought about this: according to Annie Laurie Gaylor of the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF), most people live like atheists. They don't think about gods or supernatural matters or invoke them as they go about living their lives day by day. If you're a normal person, you're already on atheism's road, traveling along. Unlike religious systems, atheism doesn't require adopting incredible, conflicting, or nonsensical beliefs.<br /><br />So stop going to church. If family, friends, or neighbors greet you with, “I haven't seen you in church lately,” that might tell you why you went there: social expectations, your standing in the community, fear of ostracism, and not thinking about the fact you were going through the motions, etc. Stop contributing your money. You're likely to hear from the pastor and elders about that. Stop praying and see what happens. Will your life be any different, will you be better or worse off? Will you be any different yourself, like ah, will you become bitter, hard-assed, immoral or less loving? Of course not. And when you're free to live outside the fold, you can objectively look at those within to see if they are better or worse off than you. That alone is an improvement, just being outside the compound.<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">“Is God willing to prevent evil but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able but not willing? Then he is malevolent.” </span>Now you're free to read all the forbidden material and to question why it should ever had been forbidden. You're free to do this without fear of being executed, tortured, and imprisoned. Just think. The fact you can do this is a wide-open opportunity to discover just what has been hidden for two thousand years and more! Lucky you. Why is God afraid of scrutiny? Where's the threat to an almighty being in that? If you’re doubting there's a “God,” you might look at what's said about “him.” He demanded the death penalty for anyone caught looking behind the curtain and seeing little men operating the levers. You see his agents have been passing off “alternative facts” and “fake news” for centuries. They don't want you prying and questioning to find the real facts. His agents are afraid of that, and rightly so. You might find yourself asking about things you should have taken seriously. For example: Why there are those who do evil because they believe by doing evil they are doing good.<br /><br />Try using a system devised by the “God” sales agents of early Christianity: They would test the other traditional gods and use those gods' failures to pass the tests as proof of their non-existence. According to their writings (which are hearsay), the other gods failed, and only their “God” passed the tests. They claimed that every single time this happened proved their god is the true one, and, they said, of course everyone accepted him. Interesting. Their “tests and proofs” were the same ones for all the gods. And yet, their followers tell you “We should not test God!” Try their method for yourself. Hold this same “God' up to scrutiny, too. Keep score of all your answered and unanswered prayers to this god, and, by the way, check to see if miracles attributed to him have any other explanation. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.<br /><br />The great Greek philosopher Epicurus wrote, “Is God willing to prevent evil but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able but not willing? Then he is malevolent.” To focus on one part of this, let's just say the God of Abraham and Mohammed and Jesus does not believe in prevention. And anyone who can see evil coming, can prevent it, and does not, billions of times every day, is just useless, and might as well not exist. I am reminded of this every time I see a news report about a “missing child,” whose body is later found. I think of the millions of prayers said with profound hope that that child will be safely returned to its already emotionally tortured parents. Thinking about the rapes and murders of so many of those children makes me sick with grief. Anyone who would allow this to go on repeatedly is the ultimate sadist. As a Christian, you were taught to worship this same god - a sadist who also drowns children (in the Great Flood) while he watches their parents desperately try to save them, even sacrificing their lives for them. And you accepted he was moral?<br /><br />All this time, living as an atheist has been referred to as a casting off, of unburdening, discovering mind-liberating writings banned for ages, and finding out why so many good people have been persecuted for even suggesting one should go wherever their questioning leads. And isn't the room with the most information the one most likely to contain the truth? Religions are a way to avoid or excuse personal responsibility, and humans can become very addicted to that. “God” will forgive that, and people like this release. On the other hand, without gods in the way, the personal choice of leaping into reality-based discoveries and making responsible decisions can become its own oft-repeating satisfaction. Give atheism a try. Dare to doubt.webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-29731373274666423972017-05-21T16:35:00.000-04:002017-06-25T16:33:35.201-04:00I was a True Follower of Jesus<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wqt4G76V3BU/WSH53MwnPOI/AAAAAAAAK24/d-02-Qpp9GEuPaAVK0THqHw53tX-KqraACLcB/s1600/cult-or-religion-16-638.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="135" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wqt4G76V3BU/WSH53MwnPOI/AAAAAAAAK24/d-02-Qpp9GEuPaAVK0THqHw53tX-KqraACLcB/s320/cult-or-religion-16-638.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">G</span>o into a Christian church parking lot any Sunday during service. You're likely to see a few expensive cars there. (My wife informs me two males, who most likely chant, “in God we trust,” wear their guns to services.) Are expensive car and/or, gun owners true followers of Jesus? Do those married males look with lust at other women, even as they sing “I have decided to follow Jesus?” Ditto. Nope, the majority of believers are “following” the party line of their particular church, and if it doesn't fit them, they change churches. Each church leader has to not only attract new customers, but even more, hang on to the ones he or she has. Tread cautiously lest they walk away, seems to be the policy. Jesus of the gospels wasn't that way. Take it or leave it, he would say; toughen up, the way ahead is narrow and your life is cheap compared to your soul's future. If you own everything, it isn't worth it if you lose that soul.<br /><br />So, just who is Jesus? Why, he's the man who walks on water, who can change that water into wine, and died for your transgressions against him, things you didn't suspect you were guilty of until you became old enough to be told you should feel guilty. Jesus is the smiling well-built man from the covers of romance novels, with his long, silky, shampooed hair and immaculate and expensive robe, which he washes in his blood to make it white again. He's every woman's gentleman, and every man's Pauline Christ. You see “him” in paintings and stained glass windows. Like “Elvis,” he's the image, not the reality. But that original image doesn't sell, and never was very appealing. Jesus has been made middle-class.<br /><br />Now, the main objection non-Christians have with evangelicals, i.e., “followers of the gospels and epistles,” those fundamentalists, is that they don't practice what they preach. They think so, adamantly objecting to any suggestion otherwise. It's easy to ignore the fundamental things that apply to being a follower of Jesus. Take it from one who knows. As a teen, I joined a monastic community. Now, I'm not going to start analyzing the factors that came together to make that decision at this late stage in my life. What lay ahead was the road of hope, the challenge, the commitment, and the fact I didn't know what the hell I was getting into. Typical teen. And my enthusiasm was infectious for those already there.<br /><br />Follow Jesus? Where's the list? Leave family behind. Check. Give up all my possessions. Check. Reject sex. Check. Don't make any plans for the future, God'll take care of you. Check. Be ready to pluck out your eye or cut off your hand, if you think owning them will deny you entrance to heaven. Next... Are you ready to die for Jesus? Check. Forgive or else your heavenly father won't forgive you. Hadn't entered my mind. Okay. Pray every day. Check. It's what monks do, duh! Fast and sacrifice, “take up your cross daily, and follow me.” All set. Oh, if I could have only looked behind me then, to see those millions of followers of Jesus! Where are they, even now?<br /><br />To be honest, I went overboard in following Jesus. The Trappists didn't even talk to one another in those days; they used sign language. And no meat, fish, or eggs? I mean, that's tough. No TV, radio, pop music, mags or newspapers. If you're going to be “in the world, not of the world,” there's the place to be. Chastity? Now that's commitment. Aha, now you're really sincere, in close quarters with the Lord, especially chosen. Ya know what I mean? And since you're obedient to his will as spoken through his representatives on earth, you worries are over. What, me worry? Now that's security. That's peace surpassing understanding. His promises are forever for those who love him, right? If you fundamentally follow the teaching of Jesus/Paul, that's what's supposed to result.<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">If “Following Jesus” sounds like a cult, it's because it is.</span>Somehow, that scenario didn't materialize. My experience of that particular road trip involving a relationship with Jesus-God slid off that straight and narrow and totaled out. And nobody blamed me for it. If I was a fundamentalist follower, there most likely would have been blame or shame in my resume, so maybe my judges either saw the inevitable, or knew damned well it demanded too much emotional involvement from any normal person to be humane. That last part might explain why nobody truly follows Jesus, or is expected to. It also explains why no clergyman quotes the demands of Jesus in re, following him. The Trappist order was “contemplative.” To give you one example of this, start to practice this habit: pick a bible text, “contemplate” it seriously by pondering what you read, consider the implications of what is claimed or said there. I did this, and that's why I'm not only an ex-Christian, but an atheist. Clergymen really want you avoid trying this. Christians aren't that serious.<br /><br />The original monks were truer to being followers of the leader Jesus than anyone. Since we didn't talk in the monastery, someone would read “inspirational” books out loud during meals. Some were original histories of the monks of the desert. These are the men who abandoned the world, became hermits to fast and “pray without ceasing.“ They were there for cleansing their minds warring against their sensuality, to live in undistracted communion with Divine essence. If they felt they should castrate themselves to do so, they would. In our 20th century world, I'm sure none of us considered what the effects of such self-imposed solitary deprivations/exile/prayer-repetitions, would have on their mental state. According to the histories, they did experience apparitions. (One famous report is of an explosive all-night struggle between a devil and St. Anthony of the Desert, from which he emerged triumphant, of course. Was that “devil,” an apparition, or himself?)<br /><br />Now the reason given for creating monasteries is this: If you're going to follow Jesus, you have to practice charity, and how can you do so as a hermit, with no one else around? This also had the practical benefit for the Christian church of herding men together to avail itself of free labor and obedient followers, who expect nothing more in payment than heavenly rewards. Why, they put not only their welfare, but their futures, into the hands of others standing in for their Jesus! (The serf system was adapted from the monastic hierarchy structure.) Monastic dogmas combine the asceticism of hermits with the exploitation of sincere human beings - modified, but still of use to control not only congregations, but individuals.<br /><br />If “Following Jesus” sounds like a cult, it's because it is. Christians are cult members, in varying degrees. Are they hypocrites because they don't accept what he asks them to do seriously? No, they're realists. No one who isn't Christian should apologize for being a realist about the Christian cult, either.webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-29919757690603065462017-05-21T16:28:00.003-04:002017-06-25T16:33:35.211-04:00 Why “God Is Sin” Is Important<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-sb4MHAbT86s/WSH4Yrwfj7I/AAAAAAAAK2s/iwg5Z9di7n0mCX-2Cyf95SWfPHwTxC8AgCLcB/s1600/cumber.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-sb4MHAbT86s/WSH4Yrwfj7I/AAAAAAAAK2s/iwg5Z9di7n0mCX-2Cyf95SWfPHwTxC8AgCLcB/s320/cumber.png" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">F</span>oundationOfUnity's essay: “<a href="http://new.exchristian.net/2017/03/god-is-sin.html">God is Sin</a>,” (3/26/2017) is worthy of serious consideration. Whatever we have been told about “sin” takes on a different meaning when it's understood as distinct from morality. The author makes this distinction when he tells us, “God is sin...this is true. I know this by the definition of sin and its relationship to god. Without god, sin could not exist for sin is the transgression of god's law.” No god, no sin. On the other hand, one can be “sinful” yet moral, ethical, loving and charitable. In fact, if we consider further, doing moral acts will often entail being sinful. This understanding of god = sin denies the dogmatic propaganda of religion, which insists that without god, any immorality is permissible. But, if this god forgives everything, all bets are off, aren't they?<br /><br />Why is a discussion of god and sin necessary? Obviously, believers in god consider obedience to his will as all important. Judging by their actions, they don't take their scriptures, dogmas, clerics, hell, or other divine punishments all that seriously any more, either. And they don't want to be bothered with facing these facts; or even thinking about them. But, they do insist sinning against god is serious enough to warrant hellfire. No believer truly has expectation of lightning bolts or any other individually-directed physical catastrophes befalling him or her as a result of sinning, anymore. But “God” is frequently invoked, nevertheless, as the ultimate deterrent to wrongdoing, in public pronouncements, political posturing, etc. Neither ethics nor morality in regards to one another is preached by church/state politicians except a citizen's and nation's duty to not sin against that god. By invoking the Christian god, such politicians also invoke the power of the state to punish, suppress, and deny civil rights to those whose lifestyles or words “sin against God.”<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">A truly 100% Christian nation would resemble an Islamic one</span> But what is this sin all about, except what each religion defines as sins? Depending on which religion you're born into, the following are “sins:” eating pork and/or shellfish, not being circumcised, not observing holy days, not fasting on prescribed days. It is sinful to question or doubt the existence of god. All of these sins have been and are civilly punished in some places in this world. All of these sins have nothing to do with moral behavior. Why would something as simple as free speech (such as blasphemy, a sinful act), deserve punishment on the same footing as crimes like theft, assault, or murder?<br /><br />Speaking one's mind about matters theological has been condemned as disrespect and disobedience to god, is sinful, therefore evil, deserving of social retaliation. How is it sin became equated with evil, since the god who is sinned against is himself the perpetrator of evil? I asked a believer, “What's the difference between immoral and sinful?” She said they are the same. I was ready with the answer, based on FoundationOfUnity's words. So, I replied, “It is immoral to murder your son. But if god tells you to kill him and you disobey him, you have committed a sin.”<br /><br />How does this knowledge impact our lives? Well, a truly 100% Christian nation would resemble an Islamic one, such as Saudi Arabia. It would be founded on submission to clerical domination and whatever sect wins will punish “sinners.” This would be history repeating itself. Millions of innocents suffered and died at the hands of those who do not sin when they believe they're obeying the will of a god they themselves accept. Wherever laws punish actions harmful to humans, prior laws have punished “the sinful.” Why laws punishing those who sin against god? With real fear of the prophetic punishments of god, his obedient ones act immorally with the best of intentions. Sin is their problem, but they insist on making their problem ours. And this explains why so much of our societies are being screwed up by them. So yes, we need serious discussions about “God is sin.”webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-31561058534817820452017-05-15T14:00:00.001-04:002017-05-21T16:36:05.843-04:00Without Enthusiasm, What is There?<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1vTVZ3koxZI/WRnsgixv8hI/AAAAAAAAK1I/J0e3WEoXIo8zdCW36zJoxjkX5wZ3WCspACLcB/s1600/enthusiasm.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="131" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1vTVZ3koxZI/WRnsgixv8hI/AAAAAAAAK1I/J0e3WEoXIo8zdCW36zJoxjkX5wZ3WCspACLcB/s320/enthusiasm.png" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">A</span>bout those 24-hr. news channels. My wife watches them every day. I used to, especially during election seasons, until they stretched out for 18 months. What was once enthusiasm faded to interest, then disappointment, and now those channels are annoying. Time to move on. It's a madhouse out there now, more aggravating than entertaining. News commentators talk every subject to death. Wouldn't it be cool to have a regular series on TLC, The Learning Channel, about atheist families? It's the channel viewers go to to learn about lives they pretend not to care about. It's the perfect place for the evangelical prudes to indulge, without each others' knowing, their curiosity about the godless they condemn. But that's not all. I'm seriously thinking about quitting my commentaries; there's neither interest nor enthusiasm, and I put a lot of labor into them. Maybe move on to something different, somewhere?<br /><br />Interests and enthusiasms make life worthwhile. When people are “trying to find” themselves, they're really looking for the interests that define themselves, which they've lost or put on the back burner for the interests of others. So, interests and enthusiasms are selfish in the way being oneself is selfish. When they're vibrant, life is also. Without them, things are pretty dull; life is contingent on having enough energy to keep it being interesting. My relatives knew this until their dying days. They went down, as is said of daredevils of the sky, “the way they wanted to.”<br /><br />The last time I saw my mother was in Ohio. She was 85 years old at the time, visiting with my older brother and his wife. This was a day before she flew back to Arizona. I said, “See you next year,” and she told me that No, she was “Tired of living and I want to be with my husband in heaven.” My mom was always a positive person, tough in business dealings, tender and defensive for her kids, and flexible as hell about their life choices, no matter how “wrong” others thought they might be. But that day she let me know her fading loss of sight and taste, combined with a life she pretty much lived as she wanted to, was ready to be put away for good. Now, she has been gone for many years, along with my brother and his wife. My sister was like her mother, but she also reached that point where she said, almost every time I'd write or talk to her, “I'm tired and I want to die.” When enthusiasm isn't in the picture, time to hang things up and mellow away, yes?<br /><br />My sister once got so carried away by a radio evangelical preacher that she left her seven kids behind and took a bus so she could run away with him. (He sent her home.) It gets me to thinking about something. I wonder if it's the personalities of these preachers that draw believers to be enthusiastic, and not their God or Jesus, as they claim. It's not inconceivable these preachers with their TV, radio, and mega church audiences, can be the equivalents of rock stars, movie, and television celebrity idols.<br /><br />Everybody should have enthusiasm. But, as one writer noted, educational systems (religion system included), try to squelch the natural-born enthusiastic instincts of children. A Montessori educational system encourages children to develop their natural interests and enthusiasms. Such killjoys, such wet blankets! We encourage our kids to question, to use their interests for discovering how the real world works. Religious institutions exploit them to be channeled into dogmatic brainwashing. The trusting child does not question motivation. The child doesn't know what “perversion of reality” means. (Come on, how insane can a claim be: washing your clothes in blood can make them white as snow?) Think of how much progress humanity could have made without religious systems sapping the curiosity we're all born with. And can you imagine trial-and-error progress without blasphemous and obscene words? Never would happen. Only the topmost worker in a gothic cathedral could get away with that, and only by muttering to himself. But curse he did, ergo... progress. Every male knows this.<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">Everybody should have enthusiasm. But, as one writer noted, educational systems (religion system included), try to squelch the natural-born enthusiastic instincts of children.</span>Governments, religions, and other institutions around the world keep trying to suppress and censor free speech and civil rights, curbing or denying enthusiasm. They want us to believe we have purposes to our lives, as long as they suit their purposes. But we're human; our enthusiasm is often at cross-purposes with their desires to control us. The bastards are pushing to make our sexual decisions for us, even forcing legislation to deny us the right to control how we choose to leave this life, for chrissakes! They'd rather have us tortured to death by whatever will inevitably end our lives and/or the hopeless medical intervention we don't want. Let it be noted: One enthusiastic purpose I have to my life is to destroy clerical power; just the opposite of what that “purpose driven life” religion wants.<br /><br />The way I see it, Christian clergy and you and I take our references from the 12 o'clock hour. It's just that theirs is 12 a.m., and ours is 12 p.m. Growing up in a religion enclosure is a world of its own. The Christian religion tells us our lives begin in the darkness of midnight, and progresses to the sunrise of our own Easter. They preach that death is just the beginning of the only life that counts, since mortal life pales in comparison to it. That's perverse. When religious lives are lived under the dark filtered-by-faith-glass, we are told to grope in blind trust, to follow the leader in darkness through life's unexpected trials and tribulations. Hell, any cult has the same spiel.<br /><br />If you are one of the 12 p.m. children, on the other hand, you begin living life in the clear light of day, seeing and discovering, interested, enthusing, through thick and thin. Life is a buffet, not a place where you must, under threat of punishment, deprive yourself of its opportunities, its pork, beef, and beverages, and sexual pleasures. Your life's purpose is your own, it isn't a lifelong battle waged to settle a religion's desire for revenge or for conquest. After years of living in all life offers, you get weary, tire out, and then you can go to your acceptable final rest, in peace. You’ve had your time singing in the sunshine, laughing in the rain, of splendor in the grass, and it's time to say “Good night, world.” Interesting, isn't it? webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-54786400439888470192017-05-15T13:52:00.001-04:002017-05-21T16:36:05.849-04:00Behind the God Façade<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><blockquote>“A mass grave containing about 800 human remains ranging in age from 35 weeks to 3 years was discovered at the former Bon Secours Mother and Baby Home in Tuam, Ireland, a Catholic orphanage that closed in 1961.” - <a href="https://www.yahoo.com/news/experts-mass-grave-ex-catholic-orphanage-ireland-134424849.html">Associated Press, March 3, 2017</a>.</blockquote><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CuYFQNoRH0A/WRnquTNLxQI/AAAAAAAAK1E/C1pBCNxH0xgr3M3scQRH43XbR8euIkONACLcB/s1600/massgrave.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="171" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CuYFQNoRH0A/WRnquTNLxQI/AAAAAAAAK1E/C1pBCNxH0xgr3M3scQRH43XbR8euIkONACLcB/s320/massgrave.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">S</span>hortly before I quit going to church with my wife, I found myself after one service, alone with her pastor. He took the opportunity to ask me if I had “issues.” I told him I didn't. (But later I asked my wife what “issues” meant.) Of course I have issues. For years now. Looking back at his question, I suspect he was planning on setting up an intervention with him and other church members to “explain to a wanderer from the faith,” just to keep him in the herd. Little did he know I never was part of his flock. If he did, he might have agreed with actor Strother Martin in the movie “Cool Hand Luke,” who said, “What we have here is failure to communicate.” But then, problems all believers deal with stem from the fact “God” fails to communicate, don't they? So, “his” delegates must speak for “him.”<br /><br />Maybe the “calling” to preach is only a social construct, to enable liars to have a livelihood. I suspect “lying for Jesus” or God has been so successful for the clergy it's a pleasure-giving habit, and because their unvalidated claims go unchallenged, so too must the deceptions multiply. When habitual lying becomes an addiction, won't it become self-deception? Isn't this combination similar to a gambling addiction? Probing doubt is needed to peel away religion's veneer.<br /><br />Things are not what they're loudly proclaimed to be when it comes to religions:<br /><br />1. Their scriptures are written with constant changing of subjects to dissuade us from investigating their claims. Ask yourself why couldn't Christianity continue as an oral tradition; why wasn't there any resurrection account written until at least thirty-plus years later? I came to this conclusion: The gospels had to be written in order to keep people from asking questions. And they were not checked for errors or veracity. Early Christianity was replete with scattered beliefs and dogmas about the nature of Jesus alone. A solution was concocted for a monopoly of power: a convention of church elders got together and voted in which “alternative facts” texts were to be “true,” and every other opinion became “heresy.” After that, anyone caught teaching anything differing from them would be punished, banished, or executed. “Alternative truth” by vote?<br /><br />2. Our disagreements with clergy about their god's personal morality might arise from the same kinds of “disagreements” we have with psychopaths. Unless we are psychopaths ourselves, we can't relate to Klaus Barbie, Ted Bundy or the Inquisitors, either. Neither can we imagine what it's like to be a bishop, rabbi, pope, priest, pastor, or imam, etc., having to cover up crimes of fellow clergy, to justify physical and psychological child abuse, or the deaths of women due to denied or botched abortions. Maybe, for the same reasons, we don't see their reasons for their indifference to giving us information, or their refusals to justify their decisions. We're looking at things from a moral and ethical position and making a mistake in thinking religious authorities are also.<br /><br />3. Organized religions, because they are founded and dominated by males, are all about Power. Moral sincerity is a facade. Does the Vatican, Russian Orthodox Church, Islamic religion, or any other belief system sincerely care about moral/ethical, behavior? Hasn't morality been a successful facade for all religious claims to authority? While clergy preach each believer has moral obligations, they practice a double standard for their own behavior.<br /><br /><br />4. All known dictatorial systems followed the blueprint laid down by Christianity: claims to own absolute truths and authority, suppression of facts, a strict structure of hierarchies, degradation or persecution of dissidents, absolute loyalty, and promises of rewards to those who obey. No surprise the Mafia is an outgrowth of the Catholic Church. What clergy are loyal to, answerable to, and uphold, is not to any higher power they preach, but The System. All other considerations, such as compassion, honesty, justice for those the system harms, are all collateral damage for the sake of preserving it forever. And it gets worse with each stretch of privilege giving the clergy a free pass. Unopposed, they'll grab all they can. The holiness, reverence for life, claims to moral superiority because of asserted, (not necessarily) seriously believed beliefs, is so much bullshit. Even the Mafia can relate to that. Even gang members know; it's all about power.<br /><br />5. Those within the grasp of religion's power are indoctrinated to believe in a man who is invisible, but feared. Nobody has seen him, heard him, and yet he has to be constantly praised and begged for favors. As a righteous god, he is unsympathetic and cruel. We see his image when soberly reflecting on the indifference of psychopathic torturers and murderers, this fictitious god who creates a facility where he can watch humans being tortured, eternally. (Eat your heart out, Klaus Barbie.) What they share is absence of remorse, empathy for their victims, with no sense of evil in following their desires to the maximum.<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">Things are not what they're loudly proclaimed to be when it comes to religions</span>6. Go behind the facade. Religions are not about morality and ethical behavior, but Power over minds, emotions, and women. Christianity sells a trade-off: forgiveness as a substitute for personal responsibility. Unlike prisons built to constrain the guilty, religions are prisons where power and control are exercised over the innocent, good, caring, humans, who don't need them. Creationism, miracles, the immovable belief in the magical power of words and manifestations are all of the same non substance: wishful appearances. Believers are not purchasing the steak, but the sizzle. Clergy are holy vacuum cleaner salesmen who tell you their product will cleanse your soul, but all they're selling is the vacuum.<br /><br />7. Why do even intelligent humans buy into the facade, stay in it, even to the point of being most fearful of losing it? When we talk about common human traumas, we consider death, destruction, divorce, health crisis, betrayals, etc. But maybe the worst of all is disillusionment. This explains a lot. I say this because, of all of them, disillusionment has the longest lasting effects. The more a person commits in love, passion, time, money, and in setting aside all other things that mean the most to him or her, so much the more devastating will be the result of finding out one has been deceived all along. It's inconceivable. The most natural reaction is rejecting this could happen, this could be true. And to reach the end of one's life realizing one has been conned, has to be the greatest disillusionment. No wonder it would be avoided as exposure to the most toxic of plagues. Denying the finality of death is one of the most powerful illusions humans cling to. Hope is the very last thing to die, as the saying goes, but even at death, the believer hopes. When thinking about the persistency and defensive power of faith (which is only another word for nothing more than gambling), make note of how terrified humans can be whenever they are faced with being disillusioned. Therefore, religion thrives.<br /><br />8. Religious teachings and scriptural writings exemplify what “moral” means to all those fictitious male deities, and the sellers who promote them as their profitable products, as compared to the rest of humanity. It's not realistic to agree to disagree with those whose purpose is to dominate you. Confrontation is necessary. Religious spokesmen should be revealed to have “failure to communicate,” because they only want their words heard, and avoid these facts.<br /><br />webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-68992061681961022862017-04-30T16:31:00.001-04:002017-05-15T14:49:00.050-04:00Ex-Christian - But Spiritual<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OwjXK6uDrHk/WQZMd_j6eYI/AAAAAAAAKz4/91Irw8_FmeU-hw5m7qWQlvCOFOgGATmswCLcB/s1600/Spiritual-Atheism.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="160" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OwjXK6uDrHk/WQZMd_j6eYI/AAAAAAAAKz4/91Irw8_FmeU-hw5m7qWQlvCOFOgGATmswCLcB/s320/Spiritual-Atheism.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">W</span>hen people tell you, “I'll pray for you,” aren't they really saying they'll hope for you? (Wizened Sage and I think so, and he suggested a response: “I'll hope for you, too.”) In a terrible bind, in imminent danger or a life-threatening situation, you'll often hear the words, “Let's try this and hope it works,” and when it does work, others say, “Your prayers have been answered.” This got me to thinking: Isn't “God,” like “'prayer,” just another word for “hope?” And, while Christian friends might ask how you can be happy without their god, nobody asks if you're unhappy without their hell.<br /><br />This is written for those who have left behind their indoctrinated beliefs, but still consider themselves “spiritual.” Too often, writers like me assume leaving blind beliefs also means rejecting spiritual ones. And yet I personally know those who are good and virtuous without a god or religion, who say they are “spiritual.” For atheists/materialists like me, this seems like a contradiction. I can smile about that; I don't have a problem with it. As it turns out, that word means something different for them than me. Since so much of the population still believes in some sort of after-death existence, angels, karma, etc., all superstitions to most ex-religious, the rest of us wonder why these beliefs still remain.<br /><br />I think one thing that puts people off reading science, psychology, and philosophy, is the fact those subjects are written with such exactness of phrasing and sources that they can't get passionate about the subjects. It's difficult to follow a narrative flow when it's interrupted with citing references in other places and giving credit to individuals. Technical language is another reason. They're “dry” to the believers and “too far over my head.” Can't be bothered. None of the romance of having easy answers like, “It's in the bible; that's enough,” or “ Mysterious ways.” Not everyone is able to get through them. Maybe the writers can't find any other words. This is unfortunate, because for one example, evolution alone is far more fascinating the any creation myths, and it's true and ongoing. (Richard Dawkins and Carl Sagan, though, are approachable and lead us out of religious darkness into the open light.)<br /><br />The cold facts of reality are already ignored by the person inclined to prefer the fun and fantasy world of emotionally involved religion that it, in pretending, offers. That person only finds confirmed “cold” facts don't count. The lures, the baits of religions, are emotional, giving their members a sense of special importance when, let's face it, no one is really all that important. (One thing I found: my sins aren't worth anyone suffering for, let alone dying for! And if belief is an option, I prefer not to believe anyone should be murdered for my benefit. Let that person live.)<br /><br />While you were in a religion, it was acceptable to judge those who didn't agree with your doctrines. You were expected to judge women seeking an abortion as morally depraved, homosexuals as choosing to be immoral, objections to prayer in public schools as efforts of enemies of God to drive him out of your country, etc. etc. If you were not prejudging their morality, you were not “a real Christian.” Eventually, that black-or-white, all-or-nothing world, didn't make sense. It really didn't. Now, you're a non-Christian, non-judgmental, looking around at humanity, instead of focused on looking inward at your inner conflicts of pleasing a god or offending him. It's a different world now. What changes us?<br /><br />I'll try to simplify some of the things I've learned recently. You can go to the magazine Free Inquiry, April/May 2017, for the details. Quite a few researchers have conducted studies on the differences between the brains of believers and non-believers, how and why they change their minds. For one thing, it appears those who have an emotional need for social contacts will attend church services, while atheists and agnostics tend to be individual thinkers. True believers are not curious or questioning, and as conservatives, respect and trust in authority figures. Those who are open to challenges and discovery for themselves, such as the liberals, question authority-claims, eventually come to the conclusion those “authorities” are conning them. This realization will send some into a tailspin, from the sense of betrayal and emptiness that follows. Those who are brave or curious enough, or who can no longer stand the contradictions, hypocrisies, the group-think, of religions, will find themselves with an identity crisis. Formerly, they identified as Christians, Muslims, Hindus, etc. Now, they are “only” themselves. They still have “spiritual” as a fallback, a security blanket, and don't we all understand that? And they tend to find others like their newly found selves. Welcome aboard.<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">True believers are not curious or questioning, and as conservatives, respect and trust in authority figures.</span>Doesn't “spiritual” describe an emotional conviction, rather than a thoughtful one? Oh sure, we all want to believe there's rationality behind our strong feelings, but what happens when we find out we've been fooling ourselves? The trouble with religious belief is that it’s not open to taking a humane look at ourselves, to not taking ourselves too seriously, to accepting we can be fooled and fool ourselves. Individuals testify to their spiritual, out of body, surreal, unreal, and overwhelming sense of awe, as if these emotions are deeper, have more meaning than human experiences alone, in a realm of their own. And yet they are the result of happy or sad emotional mind-body connections. That last sentence is too hard for spiritual persons to swallow, so they reject it. Their feelings they truly trust, they believe those feelings do not lie to them. Don't believers “just know” Allah/God/ Krishna, etc. are just as “real” as you and I? That Mohammed rode his steed into the sky and out of sight? After all, the community supports that tradition! Aren't they preferring the good feelings of wishful thinking, fantasies to reality?<br /><br />The brains of conservatives are different from those of liberals: the conservative one is mainly wired for emotion responses, while the other, though originating in emotional responses, goes further, proceeding to step back and analyze the circumstances before making decisions. Does one “go with your gut” and the other with considering the outcome? It sure looks that way. We're all familiar with individuals who go from one bad decision to another, by predominantly following their emotions. We see people jump from one set of beliefs to another, as if they're trying on shoes for a proper fit, and not seeking for truths at all. We see the emotional responses of true believers who use the sign of the cross and the sign of the finger with equally convinced passion, originating from their deeply-held beliefs/hopes. We can well relate to those emotions, standing now on the outside of religion, we can also feel just how “spiritual” they and we are. The difference is that whereas we can have a free sense of humor about our all-too-human-spirituality, they are insulted by it.<br /><br /><i>Note: in re Easter: “<a href="http://new.exchristian.net/2011/09/gospel-truth.html">The Gospel Truth</a>"</i>webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-19731711191920558672017-04-16T13:05:00.000-04:002017-05-15T14:49:00.043-04:00If Truth Doesn't Matter Anymoref<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OhDT6DGpV_M/WPOkOHjop3I/AAAAAAAAKxs/sFao1JAmJKQPcZVvnGgiiH8dQHyqxc4IwCLcB/s1600/truth1.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="136" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OhDT6DGpV_M/WPOkOHjop3I/AAAAAAAAKxs/sFao1JAmJKQPcZVvnGgiiH8dQHyqxc4IwCLcB/s320/truth1.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">P</span>erhaps you've heard of this case: A woman lost a custody battle for her two children. She killed her ex in revenge. Hers was not an special case. Spouses have been murdered so that their mates will, in their belief, be able to live with their lovers and/or children, happily ever after. In every case, the murderers followed their hearts, not their heads and minds. In virtually every case, they were caught and sentenced to prison. So, they lost the lover, the children, and the family. (In the first example, over custody, the mother would<br />have had at least, visitation rights.) In the pursuit of having it all, they lost it all. The truth is, if they had gone through legal processes, they would have ended up with something rather than nothing. They went with their emotions, their guts, instead.<br /><br />Any human being understands what's happened with these perpetrators. Except for those psychopaths who kill because they feel entitled to fulfill their desires, they've killed out of passion. We all fall in and out of love, unthinkingly, often irrationally, and usually, wholeheartedly. A common response from questioning a believer on impossible things is, “I know in my heart it's true.” But “knowing in my heart” and saying that to others who “understand” because they also “know in their hearts,” doesn't tell us anything about whether it's true or not. It's saying that the person feels that it's so, therefore it is. If you ask believers to write down clearly what they “know,” they can't express it<br />intelligently. And if they can't express it clearly, they can't think it clearly, either. (Try it yourself. Writing forces you to read over what you say. And oh what tangled webs we and apologetics weave, when we our biases allow ourselves to be deceived. But I digress.)<br /><br />In polite society, why do we accept that people who, without evidence of truth or even thinking things through, should remain unchallenged because their sincerity means they own truths? Maybe those truths are “real” to them, because they're emotionally driven by personal fears or paranoia, even supported by the social emotions of others with the very same fears? Is so, they are “realities” to the believer. Would we go into the insane asylum and assume the “truths” therein should not be confronted just because everyone inside agrees with them? Why give beliefs equal respect with actual facts and truths? This is a huge mistake. And it can be a dangerous one when truth is distorted to support emotions.<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">Why do we accept that people who, without evidence of truth or even thinking things through, should remain unchallenged because their sincerity means they own truths?</span>Take a deep breath. Emotions can and do lie to us. So often what “seems” to us to be true, (such as, “but they seemed to be so happy,” or, “I can't believe he did that; he always seemed so positive...”) turns out not to be, and vice versa. We hear those words a lot, and they should tell us something. If our emotions didn't lie to us, the words, “I'm sorry” wouldn't be used so often. We wouldn't regret emotional morasses we jump into. A major problem with religions is, “Faith means never having to say you're wrong.” The emotional draw of wanting to believe in a happily forever afterlife is so powerful that even some non-religionists will believe in it. Describing that afterlife brings up all the pleasantries of life on earth imaginable. Believing there's a great big loving father and his angels watching over humanity pulls at the heart-strings of those who prefer to ignore the evidence: no such being exists, given the evidence to the contrary. People go to mosques, churches, temples, synagogues and shrines, for the emotional support and mutual pleasures. No gods appear or are heard from.<br /><br />You say, “Morally speaking, does any of this matter? It doesn't hurt anyone, does it?” Think again. Dispassionately looking at faith means paying close attention to passion, passion driven to the exclusion of reality. It's so passionate that it's created its own “real” world overwhelming our universe. Imagine the joy those pilots felt when crashing planes into the Twin Towers, or the “fait accompli” feeling of a gunman mowing down the lives of “baby killers” at an abortion clinic!<br /><br />Consider the constant erosion of facts, the wars on evidence that keep increasing, in order for the biased emotions of the most sincere Christian<br />believer to prevail over rationality in societies. Those comfortable emotions of faith, unanswerable to reason, to evidence, have always justified destroying the rights of others. They still do. We're experiencing the effects now.<br /><br />When truth doesn't matter anymore, what does? If only emotionally driven biases count, where does that lead to? There will be no “order” but that enforced without evidence, without investigation and discussion, without dissension, without the freedom to disagree, or respect for reason. Isn't this scenario familiar? Are we headed to yet another Dark Ages? And there goes the end to democracy. How do you feel about that, now?<br /><br />webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-16228904827015705142017-04-16T12:57:00.000-04:002017-05-15T14:49:34.374-04:00The False Reality – Why Christianity requires Ignorance<i>By Luke ~ </i><br /><br /><b>Ignorance</b><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6_Lk8zAW5KY/WPOiNKAeKNI/AAAAAAAAKxg/m01Bxh8cv7s4kZN-AZoaoyWOe7YWkfyjQCLcB/s1600/ignorance.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="125" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6_Lk8zAW5KY/WPOiNKAeKNI/AAAAAAAAKxg/m01Bxh8cv7s4kZN-AZoaoyWOe7YWkfyjQCLcB/s400/ignorance.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">I</span>gnorance really is bliss. Before I read the bible I only had a vague notion of Christianity and God. After reading the bible, however, I was forced to the conclusion that God is not real. I now understand why religion relies on faith. Faith, by definition, requires ignorance. I came to realize that the people who have the strongest faith are the ones who shield themselves from any information that contradicts what they believe. They create their own reality out of intentional ignorance and pass their opinions on to anyone who will listen. This, in turn, influences the perceived reality of the more trusting and suggestable individuals of our society; our children and I was no exception.<br /><br /><b>False Reality</b><br /><br />As a child my view of reality was influenced by my dad’s perception of reality which was shaped primarily on his beliefs and opinions. He had the typical Christian view that God created everything and that if you want to live on in heaven after you die, you have to ask his son, Jesus, to save you. Everything he “knew” about reality came from books written by an ancient people. This was their view of reality which, by the way, didn’t include any concepts of space, planets or galaxies. They thought that the earth was the only thing there was. They had no idea that the earth was a sphere orbiting the sun. Even though this was an ancient view, my dad chose to adopt it because it gave him all the answers he wanted. He made a conscious decision that this reality was real and NOBODY was going tell him otherwise.<br /><br /><b>Fear of Death</b><br /><br />I think the major reason for this was because my dad was afraid of death. He wasn’t just scared of his own death, he was scared for me and especially for my brother. He didn’t want us to die and he thought he found a way to survive death. So, he took us to church. There we were introduced to a reality that we weren’t allowed to question. While my brother fully accepted this reality, I was skeptical. Because of my skepticism, I never got the level of approval from my dad that my brother did. Anyway, the point is, despite all of my dad’s efforts, my brother still died. He was killed in a hit and run while riding his bicycle. It was a tragic event and I think my dad’s faith in his chosen reality gave him a way to rationalize it. For my dad, knowing that my brother shared his opinion and that he did everything he was supposed to do to secure his spot in the afterlife made his death easier to handle. It made him feel like his son was still ok. I can understand that, and I began to wonder if there was any truth to what he’d been saying. Was my brother still alive somehow in some kind of afterlife? My dad already had his answer, he was convinced that my brother had to be in heaven. Like a lot of people, my dad found his answers from religion and the church assured him that as long as you do what they say, you will live on in heaven after you die. This was the reality he was born into, indoctrinated by his parents and the majority of society.<br /><br /><b>Indoctrination</b><br /><br />This indoctrination begins in the church. The church presents as fact that God created everything in existence and that He is the authority on what is right and wrong and that we know this through His own words as they were recorded in the bible. They preach that you are born with a death sentence because of the actions of your ancestors, Adam and Eve disobeying God. They ate of the tree that He told them not to eat from. Because of their disobedience, God could no longer allow them to have eternal life. In the bible, disobedience is called sin and the penalty for sin is death. Since there is no way for you to live a perfect sin free life you will die. You will die, not go to hell. The concept of eternal torture in hell as opposed to just dying was invented by the Church. The bible does not say you will either go to heaven or hell, although most churches preach this. It says that everyone dies and that God will resurrect everyone at a later date to be judged. Anyone who asked to be saved will have eternal life in heaven while everyone else, along with Satan and his angels, will be burned to death on earth while it’s being destroyed. Because of the fact that no one can live a life free of sin, God decided to come down to earth, become a man named Jesus, live a sin free life himself, accept responsibility for all of mankind’s sins, and fulfill the death penalty by dying on the cross. Three days later He brought himself back to life and promised to become part of you through something called the Holy Spirit and accept responsibility for your individual sins so that you may have eternal life. You will die but if you ask Jesus to save you then you will be resurrected and you will get to go to heaven.<br /><br /><b>Avoiding Consequences</b><br /><br />Think about that for a minute. Is this really moral? You deserve to die even though there is nothing you can do to avoid sin? And it doesn’t matter whether you were a good person or a terrible person in life because as long as you ask to be saved, you will be granted eternal life and you will get to skip out on being burned to death. So I can commit whatever crime I want as long as I remember to ask Jesus to save me before I die? How is that moral? If you truly are breaking some divine laws and death is what you deserve then the RIGHT thing for you to do would be to accept the consequences of your actions (and apparently Adam and Eve’s). You should acknowledge that what you did was wrong and ask for forgiveness but you should NOT have the audacity to expect to be saved and even worse than that expect someone else, namely Jesus, to pay for your, and Adam and Eve’s, sins!<br /><br /><b>Morality</b><br /><br />If I were to kill someone I would fully expect to go to prison and possibly get the death penalty. I may regret what I did and be sorry for it but I would have no right to ask to be saved from prison and ask that same person to take the blame! But this seems to be perfectly acceptable to Christians, they call it Grace. They would say that I was merely under the influence of Satan and that if I would have just been, instead, influenced by Jesus then I wouldn’t have committed the crime. They believe that people naturally behave immorally. They believe that without fear of divine consequences there is nothing to stop people from doing all kinds of awful things. As if religion has to teach people right from wrong and that without God people are incapable of making moral judgements. They believe that things are wrong because God says they’re wrong, because, according to the bible, morality is dependent on obedience to God. That’s ridiculous. The truth is, people are capable of making their own moral decisions. There has never been a murder where the murderer was completely surprised that he was being arrested. He may not care about what he did, but he knows it was wrong. (I’m of course talking about individuals whose brains are functioning properly) There doesn’t have to be a rule stating “thou shalt not kill”. You already know it’s wrong. It’s not rocket science. If your actions or words are going to negatively affect someone else then it’s wrong. You know this already because you have empathy for others, unless of course, you’re a psychopath. The problem arises when you choose to ignore the morality you are born with, your conscious, and do things that you know are wrong.<br /><br /><b>Accountability</b><br /><br />Whether people decide to do the right thing or the wrong thing, the accountability is on them not Satan or God. Unfortunately, religion removes this accountability from the individual. People stop thinking for themselves, believing they are merely a "vessel" for God to use. "God is using me to carry out his will". This is considered noble, relinquishing all control over to God. This how the church conditions you to think, “Don’t attempt to understand why God wants you to do things, just do it”. This is simply wrong, you should always think before you act. You are in control of your own actions! You are capable of making your own decisions! Your life is a result of your decisions and actions, and society as a whole is a result of everyone’s decisions and actions, not part of some predetermined plan! The only reason that we as a society need law is because some people choose to ignore their conscious and do things that they know are wrong.<br /><br /><b>Opinions</b><br /><br />But I guess that’s just my opinion. Just like you, I’m entitled to my own opinions. There’s nothing wrong with opinions as long as you recognize that they are opinions and you don’t present them as facts. You can either have faith that your opinion is correct or you can accept that your opinion may be wrong. Yes, opinions can be wrong. For example, you may have the opinion that sugar makes kids hyper (I use this example because you probably think this is true) but your opinion would be wrong. If you hold this opinion then your initial reaction to this statement might be “No, that’s not true! I know sugar makes kids hyper because I’ve seen it!” But you’re wrong. The only way to determine whether an opinion is right or wrong is to use logical reasoning. We have a word for this, Science. When science is applied to the question of whether or not sugar causes hyperactivity in children, the answer turns out to be no. The results were published in the November 22, 1995 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association. It doesn’t matter whether you agree with this answer or not, that’s what it is. It doesn’t matter how strongly you feel that you’re right, YOU ARE WRONG! Do not have the attitude of “Well, I know it’s true, I don’t care what anyone says”. That’s willful ignorance and that makes you an idiot. If you feel like your opinion is correct then do the work, yes I said work, necessary to find out for yourself. Or at least find someone who has done the work. If you’re right then you’ll have the evidence, but if you’re wrong then accept it and move on.<br /><br /><b>Science</b><br /><br />It has always been the goal of science to find out how the world actually is rather than how we imagine it is. But for some reason people either aren’t properly educated in science or they just don’t care about it at all. So, instead of learning about the way the world actually is, which is what science is all about, many people rely on their own opinions or worse, the views of ancient cultures through religion. If you know nothing or very little about science then your view of reality is FALSE! Sure, some of your opinions may be correct but you have no way of knowing which opinions are right and which ones are wrong. Without science we have no way of knowing what’s real and what isn’t. Science is about finding the CORRECT answers to our questions. It’s not just another thing to believe in, it’s a method for finding out whether your belief, meaning your opinion, is true.<br /><br /><b>Faith</b><br /><br />To find out whether the belief in the Christian God was true, I had to study the only information available that describes him; the bible. It was hard for me right from the beginning because the creation story in Genesis didn't match the scientific facts at all. But, I thought, maybe I didn't understand the science or ancient Hebrew language well enough. So I expanded my scientific knowledge as well as my knowledge of the biblical language itself. This is the opposite of what most religious people do. Whenever science contradicts a religious text then they say "...the bible is the Word of God and is infallible......if the scientific facts don't match up then the science is obviously wrong...of course God's not wrong..." They refuse to think logically because they don't want their belief to be false. This is called faith, believing something is true without any evidence to support it. Faith is not a good thing. It requires you to ignore facts that contradict what you believe.<br /><br /><b>The Scientific Method</b><br /><br />Religions require you to have faith because they claim to possess absolute truth. Science, however, doesn’t claim anything, it just reveals what has to be true based on the information available. Our scientific knowledge grows and changes as we gather more information. The more information we gather supporting a particular theory the more probable it is that it's true. If information becomes available that contradicts a particular theory then that theory has to be false. The whole reason the scientific method was devised is so we can be sure that what we think we know is really true and we're not just deluding ourselves into a false reality.<br /><br /><b>Fact Checking</b><br /><br />I thought that if I could definitively root the biblical “facts” to actual known facts then I could be sure that what I was reading was actually true. I had to do this because if the creation story is false then that discredits the rest of the bible. There are no contradictions in the truth. The Hebrew language does allow room for different interpretations because each word can have different meanings depending on how it’s used or even how it’s written. Because of this leeway, I was able to loosely relate each day of creation with the scientific facts. But the scripture still had to be interpreted a certain way for it to make sense and I started veering from known scientific facts to what was merely scientifically possible. I had to make a lot of assumptions, a major one being that the 6 days of creation was mathematically equivalent to 13.7 billion years. Another one being that the first day of creation began with the beginning of the universe even though the bible is clearly describing the beginning of earth with everything in the sky added later. What I came up with was, at the very least, a scientifically plausible Genesis creation story. If you are curious, you can read my scientific creation story, which is based on pure speculation, here.<br /><br /><b>God is Immoral</b><br /><br />I was ok with “scientifically plausible” because I was treating the bible as a historical, error free document. But as I continued to read the bible it quickly became clear to me that the bible is not the moral guide book that Christians claim it to be and I realized that I was stretching the truth to support my assumptions. By far, the biggest assumption I had was that God is an all knowing morally perfect being incapable of evil. But the God the bible describes is much different and seems to be more human than divine. He sets a terrible example for people to follow. God, for some reason, hates handicapped people (Leviticus 21:17-24) and is many times jealous and vindictive, allowing slavery (Leviticus 25:44-46, Exodus 21:2-6, Exodus 21:20-21, Ephesians 6:5 , 1 Timothy 6:1-2, Luke 12:47-48) (including sex slaves) (Exodus 21:7-11), rape (Judges 21:10-24, Numbers 31:7-18, Deuteronomy 20:10-14, Deuteronomy 22:28-29, Deuteronomy 22:23-24, 2 Samuel 12:11-14, Deuteronomy 21:10-14, Judges 5:30), child abuse (Judges 11:29-40, Isaiah 13:16), and a lot of murder. God not only allows it, and clearly approves of it, but he specifically orders it many times. God, himself, killed hundreds of thousands of people. I cannot believe just how many instances of murder there are in the bible. There are even specific rules for who you are supposed to kill. Kill unbelievers (2 Chronicles 15:12-15), kill followers of other religions (Deuteronomy 17: 2-7, Deuteronomy 13:6-12, Numbers 25:1-9), kill witches (as if they were real!) (Exodus 22:18), kill fortune tellers (Leviticus 20:27), kill people who ignore priests (Deuteronomy 17:12), kill children for cursing their parents (Leviticus 20:9), kill adulterers (Leviticus 20:10), kill the child who hits his parents (Exodus 21:15), kill gay people (Leviticus 20:13, Romans 1:26-32), kill entire towns if one person worships another god (Deuteronomy 13:12-19), kill women who are not virgins on their wedding night (Deuteronomy 22:16-21), kill anyone who blasphemes (Leviticus 24:10-16), kill anyone who works on the Sabbath (Exodus 31:12-15). God kills too. God killed 42 children for making fun of a prophet's bald head by sending 2 bears to tear them to pieces (2 Kings 2:23-24), he sent a lion to kill a man because he didn’t strike the prophet with his weapon when the prophet told him to (1 Kings 20:35-36), he killed people for looking at the ark of the covenant, a box containing the 10 commandments (1Samuel 6:19-20), he killed all of the firstborn of Egypt just to prove He was real (Exodus 11:4-8), and of course he killed everyone on earth except for Noah and his family. God killed and ordered many more killings throughout the bible. I'll let you read the rest yourself. The Christian justification to these crimes is always "they deserve to die because of their immorality". Nobody deserves to die. But that’s the theme of the bible, some people deserve to live and some deserve to die.<br /><br /><b>Obey God or Die</b><br /><br />Religious people view life as a privilege that can be taken away. Physical life doesn't seem to mean much, if anything to them. They see it as a temporary state where they are to be morally tested. Many anxiously await death for themselves and everyone else for the perceived reward or punishment that follows in the afterlife. Some going so far as wishing for Jesus’ return and the apocalypse. Killing someone is never okay, yet God demands it. Obey God or die. This includes children - "The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open." (Hosea 13:16) <br /><br /><b>Women are Property</b><br /><br />God, on more than one occasion ordered the massacre of entire villages including the children and non-virgin women. The virgins were to be raped. Seriously? Of course the bible doesn't always use the word "rape" opting for "take them for yourselves as wives"' but the meaning is clear. In the book of Judges (21:10-24) an entire village is massacred and the virgins were raped. When they didn't find enough virgins to rape they hid beside the roads and kidnapped more! God told them to do this! There are laws for rape too. Kill the rape victim if she didn't cry for help (Deuteronomy 22:23-24). If a man is caught raping a woman then he must pay 50 pieces of silver to her father and the rape victim must marry him. (Deuteronomy 22:28-29). This is because a woman was the property of her father until another man purchased her to become his wife, but only if she was a virgin. If a man rapes her then it becomes “you break it, you bought it”. And if she cannot prove that she is a virgin on her wedding night then she doesn’t deserve to live. “If a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, ‘I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,’ then the girl’s father and mother…shall display the cloth[that the couple slept on] before the elders of the town…If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of the town shall stone her to death” (Deuteronomy 22:13-21). Unbelievable.<br /><br /><b>God Approves of Slavery</b><br /><br />The bible makes it clear that women have no rights and, along with slaves, are merely the personal property of their owners. The bible is also careful not to use the word "slave" opting for the word servant instead. Many Christians pretend that biblical servants were different than slaves because some voluntarily entered these indentured servant agreements. But they were still bought, sold, beaten, and treated as property not human beings. The bible even gives specific rules on how to get slaves, how hard you can beat them, and when you can have sex with the female slaves. God apparently doesn’t think it’s wrong to own another person. “Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. ” (Leviticus 25:44, 45).<br /><br /><b>The Bible is of Human Origin</b><br /><br />There are many other atrocities in the bible, mostly in the Old Testament, but they are simply too numerous for me to go through them all. Don't believe me? Read the bible yourself. It's not all bad but you cannot just pick out the good parts and ignore the bad parts. You have to ask yourself "Why is there so much hate, prejudice, and violence in a book that is supposed to the word of an all-knowing, all-loving God?” You know the answer, even though you may not want to admit it. The bible is NOT of divine origin and the God it describes is NOT a morally perfect being. But don’t just take my word for it, read the bible for yourself. Actually read it! You know the difference between right and wrong. Just because God is doing it or approves of it doesn’t automatically make it right.<br /><br /><b>Jesus Approves of the Law</b><br /><br />Some Christians claim that the Old Testament laws are no longer valid because Jesus was the "Lamb", the last and ultimate blood sacrifice. Over and over again God says he requires blood sacrifices because "the wages of sin is death" and something has to die for forgiveness of sins (hence all of the killing in the Old Testament) and Jesus' death was to be the final one to cover all sins. (Why can’t God just forgive you? Good question) But, Jesus never said he came to abolish the law, he came to fulfill it. (Matthew 5:17). “Has not Moses given you the law, and yet none of you keeps the law?” (John 7:19). Jesus was not happy that people were ignoring the teachings and laws of Moses. Jesus told people that they were required to obey the law. (Matthew 23:1-3). He clearly approved of the law and numerous times he criticized the Jews, especially the Rabbis, for not following it. Of course he did! According to the bible, he was God in the flesh! In John 1:1 we read "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God." In verse 14 we read “The word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.” We are told explicitly that Jesus Christ is the God of the Old Testament! So, even if it were true that the law is no longer valid, the fact still remains that God at one point in time required the law to be followed. Many of these laws, and many of the things God told people to do, were bizarre and unquestionably immoral and cruel. God behaved IMMORALLY in the Old Testament! Read the bible!<br /><br /><b>Biblical Authors admit Error</b><br /><br />The writers of the bible eventually had to admit that the morality of Jesus was far superior to God’s morality and that the Old Testament laws should not be followed by anyone. (Hebrews 8:6-7, 13, Acts 15:1-29). A direct contradiction to Jesus’ statement, “For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven”. (Matthew 5:18-19)<br /><br /><b>Jesus is Moral</b><br /><br />It's pretty clear that the bible is merely a reflection of the culture of the time. A record of a violent culture and a violent God. This God is obviously fictional, but I do believe that the Jewish people did have real spiritual experiences where they truly believed they were seeing God and communicating with him. Like my dad and my brother, they truly felt that what they believed was real. Jesus was no different, and unlike God, he actually set a good example for people to follow. Like Moses, Jesus believed he was in direct communication with God and most historians now believe that he actually existed. He was a Galilean Jewish teacher who was born between 7 and 2 BC, a time when the Jewish people of Israel were anxiously awaiting a savior that would free them from Roman rule. Jesus understood himself to be this long awaited savior that Moses wrote about (Deuteronomy 18:15, Deuteronomy 32:43, Hebrews 8:4-5). Even though Jesus was familiar with and even agreed with the teachings of Moses his own teachings were usually morally sound. Jesus taught that we should show love for one another (Matthew 19:18-19, Mark 12:31, John 13:34, John 15: 12-17), love our enemies (Luke 6:34-36, Matthew 5:43-47, Luke 10:29-37), forgive (Matthew 18:21-22, Luke 17:3-4), serve others (Luke 6:29-30), lead by example (Matthew 5:14-16), listen to our conscious which he called the Holy Spirit (John 14:25-27) that the kingdom of God is not a physical place, it’s within you (Luke 17:20-21), that we should not worry (Matthew 6:25-27) , and that you should not judge people (Matthew 7:1-3, Luke 6:37, John 8:3-11).<br /><br /><b>The Science of Spirituality</b><br /><br />The temptation is to dismiss all religious experiences when you realize that there is no truth behind the religion itself. But people from all over the world are still having real spiritual experiences and they deserve a scientific explanation. Fortunately, there are credible scientists working on this. Dr. Michael Persinger, among others, are providing those explanations and you can see that research here.<br /><br /><b>Lost Souls will Burn</b><br /><br />I think that most people want to do good things and go to church because they think it's the right thing to do and because it makes them feel good. Many are also afraid of death and have probably heard that they will go to hell unless they become part of the group that has been "saved by Jesus". But this is only if they happen to be born in the right part of the world. If someone happens to be born in India, for example, then they are doomed to hell simply because they were born in a place where Hinduism, not Christianity, is the dominant religion. You see the flawed logic? Christians feel that it is their duty to win these "lost souls" for God. They disrespect all other religions by pushing their beliefs onto other cultures simply because they believe they are worshiping the right God and everyone on earth is going to burn in hell unless they save them. The bible even tells them to kill these worshipers of other gods and this is what Christians have done repeatedly in the past because they truly believe this is what God wants. Kill the unbelievers because they are enemies of God. Unfortunately, there are still people who kill in the name of God today and these people are called Terrorists. Would you kill someone if God told you to? I wouldn't.<br /><br /><b>Churches Ignore the Bible</b><br /><br />I’m not the only one who knows about all of the terrible things in the bible. Church leaders know, that’s why their sermons are rarely about anything in the Old Testament. No church uses the bible in its entirety. In fact, most barely use it at all and when they do it's mostly the New Testament. They pick out which verses support their message and ignore the rest. I will admit that their messages are generally good ones and they do, for the most part, encourage a good, decent lifestyle and they do a lot of good things. However, these good things come from church doctrine based on the biblical verses they deem acceptable. They take these verses and form a message that you can apply to your modern lifestyle.<br /><br /><b>The Bible is a Symbol</b><br /><br />The more closely a church follows the bible the more hateful, prejudice, and archaic the congregation becomes. But, as I found out for myself, people don't go to church to learn about what the bible says. Most Christians haven't even read the bible, only verses here and there from the sermons and usually only from the New Testament. Anyone who has read it, I find it hard to believe that they are ok with all of the terrible things it promotes. The bad parts are simply ignored or explained away. So, rather than the foundation of the Christian belief system, which is what I thought it was, the bible seems to be more like a symbol. Something people can use to give them meaning for the things that happen in their lives, especially if they've gone through a tragedy, finding a verse that seems to apply to their situation. In my personal tragedy when my brother was killed in a hit and run on his bicycle some Christians told me "it's all part of God's plan". Or “Everything happens for a reason”. Really? What kind of a plan involves suffering? A terrible one. Other people said "God just wanted him to come home". This implies that God not only killed him but he killed him for selfish reasons. Still other people said “Because God gave us free will He has to allow bad things to happen". This implies that God is either just an observer or isn't present at all. If that's the case then He doesn't answer prayers either.<br /><br /><b>Belief is based on Emotion</b><br /><br />These Christians were trying to assign meaning to a meaningless event not thinking about whether it makes logical sense. But religion isn't about logic, it's about emotion. Emotions are irrational, this is why it’s futile to have a rational conversation with a Christian about their belief. They don’t believe what they believe because it makes logical sense, they believe it because of the way they feel. They love Jesus. When someone questions or attacks their belief they see it as an attack on someone they love and they will naturally be defensive. When you love someone you don’t care about whether it makes sense or not.<br /><br /><b>Science provides Real Answers</b><br /><br />I realize that people want answers and want to feel like things happen for a reason. They want there to be some purpose to life just like they did at the time the scriptures were written and the church provides them with easy answers. Unfortunately, these answers come from the philosophy of the church which is based loosely on the flawed foundation of the bible. I’m not saying it’s wrong to love Jesus, it’s never wrong to love anyone. Jesus actually sets a good example to follow and it wouldn’t be a bad thing to be more like him. I’m not even saying it’s wrong to go to church, as long as the church is promoting love and not hate. I’m saying that if you want real answers you have to use logical reasoning, aka science, rather than just relying on your own opinions or adopting the views of an ancient people.<br /><br /><b>Chance not Destiny</b><br /><br />There are reasons for things that happen but these reasons do not come from some plan devised by a higher being. They arise from a complex series of cause and effect events and by the choices living things make in response to those events. In the case of my brother’s death, the reason my brother died was because he chose to ride his bike to work at the same time a complete moron chose to drive recklessly down the same road. Anything could have changed this outcome. There could have been a traffic jam, my brother’s bike tire could have gone flat, the driver could’ve decided to stay home or slow down, my brother could’ve taken an alternate route, or left a little earlier or later...There are a hundred things that could’ve happened but didn’t. It wasn’t meant to happen, it happened by chance.<br /><br /><b>Faith Requires Ignorance</b><br /><br />If you want to be a Christian and you want to be secure in your belief then you absolutely cannot think logically about what you believe. Faith, by definition, requires ignorance. Your belief has to be based on pure emotion. Do not attempt to understand the bible or God. If you choose to read the bible, then you MUST ignore the bad parts and only read the good parts. Trust your own moral judgment. Or better yet, bypass the bible altogether and let your life be guided solely by your own conscious. You already know the difference from right and wrong, nobody has to tell you, you’re born with this ability.<br /><br /><b>Knowledge Destroys Faith</b><br /><br />I made the mistake of studying the bible. I wanted to truly understand it because I thought it was the basis of the Christian belief system. This unavoidably destroyed any faith I had in God. I might have been a Christian if I went to church regularly and just followed their traditions. But I had to seek knowledge and, because of this, my faith weakened until it finally disappeared. I don’t have the answer to what happens when we die, but neither does the bible. However, I do know that the only way to find out is to use logical reasoning - Science.webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-55926730112462487062017-04-16T12:45:00.001-04:002017-04-30T17:30:51.185-04:00White Women Voters<i>By Karen Garst ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-rVeahz2Ij_M/WPOfsNPq38I/AAAAAAAAKxU/vh4nvQh0PIohCcUAVx4eOVTGO-S1No4tQCLcB/s1600/donald_trump.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-rVeahz2Ij_M/WPOfsNPq38I/AAAAAAAAKxU/vh4nvQh0PIohCcUAVx4eOVTGO-S1No4tQCLcB/s320/donald_trump.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">A</span>fter the recent selection of Donald Trump as president-elect of the United States, many people have tried to fathom how most of the polls were inaccurate in predicting his victory. Richard Dawkins tweeted that pollsters got it wrong because the people they were talking to simply “were ashamed to admit they were Trump supporters.” Sarah Haider added that “when political correctness takes over—you don’t know how people actually feel.” These statements go a long way to explain how the predictive polls were inaccurate. But more important than the inaccuracy of the polls themselves is an interesting fact revealed by the final election results—52 percent of white women supported Trump, while Clinton received 94 percent of the votes of black women.<br /><br />Who are these white women? Why did they vote the way they did? Are they simply opposed to reproductive rights for women? Unconcerned about family leave? Oblivious to health care programs like the Affordable Care Act? Blind to the future student loan debt of their children? It is very likely that these women are highly religious. The Pew Research Center has identified that 81 percent of those who identify as white, born-again Evangelical Christians voted for Trump. Nearly 90 percent of Republican women voted for Trump. We can infer that a large number of the white women who voted for Trump were Republican and religious.<br /><br />But is it just that these women identify as religious, or is there a stronger aspect of religion at work here? Is there a reason they might be less likely to support a woman candidate for president and to vote against policies that might be in their self-interest? Yes. I believe it is the legacy of worshipping a male deity and the psychological impact of this on very religious women, particularly Evangelicals and Fundamentalists.<br /><br />The move from worshipping a goddess or a pantheon of gods containing male and female gods to a single male deity is well documented. Author Karen Armstrong maintains that the move in early Judaism to eliminate worship of other gods may have taken 600 years.[1] Although Catholicism elevated the role of the Virgin Mary and female saints, perhaps to appease women, the Protestant Reformation eliminated any reference to these women. Martin Luther had a particularly pernicious view of women. “Take women from their housewifery and they are good for nothing.”[2]<br /><br />Karen L. Garst, The Faithless Feminist <span class="pullquote">Take women from their housewifery and they are good for nothing</span>With a sole male deity and men as priests, rabbis, and imams, it was rare for women to even question the power of male leadership until the 19th century. In Fundamentalist or Evangelical households, the impact of the worship of a male deity is still pervasive and its impact on women manifold. First, there is a strong emphasis on sin. Ann Wilcox, one of the women who wrote about her upbringing as a Fundamentalist in my book, Women Beyond Belief: Discovering Life without Religion, states that people are taught not just that they commit sin, but that they ARE sin. This doctrine was emphasized throughout the history of Christianity by such notables as St. Augustine, who lay the responsibility for the cause of sin—carnal lust—squarely on Eve and therefore all women. Second, as stated in 1 Corinthians 11:3, the father is the head of the earthly home and thus rules over women. Fundamentalists still cling to this prescription today as in the statement— “a woman’s ideal fulfillment is usually motherhood.” Marsha Abelman, another essayist, was raised in the Church of Christ. She writes that her father had complete control. She recently told me that if her father would have sexually abused her, there would have been no one to deny his right to do so. Third, love in marriage is defined as obedience to the husband. Fundamentalists state this plainly—“the husband being the head of the wife and authority over the children.” Ann recounted that her mother talked back to her father once and he immediately grabbed her and told her to stop. She never did it again.<br /><br />Marlene Winnell has been a pioneer in addressing the impact of this type of Fundamentalist upbringing. She coined the term Religious Trauma Syndrome (RTS) to describe “a recognizable set of symptoms experienced as a result of prolonged exposure to a toxic religious environment and/or the trauma of leaving the religion.” The psychological impact explained in Winnell’s book, Leaving the Fold, mirrors Ann Wilcox’s experience to a tee. Even after a period of thirty years away from her religious experience, her mind “was still being assaulted with irrational fear for disbelieving.”[3]<br /><br />Is it any wonder that women, strongly under the influence of the type of Fundamentalist religion that teaches that women are sinful, men are in charge, and their job is to obey, voted for Trump? Wasn’t he the epitome of the man in charge during his campaign? Over and over he used the language of male power. Nearly every statement he made was couched in terms that HE would be in charge and HE would make things happen. He rarely talked policy. He rarely cited specifics. “Let’s Make America Great Again!” He rarely talked about working with other politicians or any team whatsoever which might have diminished his perceived power. His language was the same that these white Evangelical women had been hearing from their earliest moments as children of controlling fathers, every day in their homes as wives, and several times a week at church.<br /><br />When I fall asleep at night, words come unbidden to my brain. I start to recite a children’s prayer I learned long ago—“Now I lay me down to sleep, I pray the Lord my soul to keep….” Even though I have now been an atheist for decades, my brain still replays that veneration of a male god. Imagine how amplified this focus must be for women who attend church every Sunday, most often with a male standing in front of them pronouncing faith in the one true male god. Every song, every ritual, every doctrine does nothing but emphasize this maleness.<br /><br />It would be interesting to see a psychological study on how Fundamentalist women, more liberal Christians, and atheists would rank male and female leaders. A comparison of these three groups might reveal the deep psychological impact that religion has, particularly on women.<br /><br />In the meantime, there are resources to help people recover from religion, especially the toxic, misogynistic Fundamentalist ones. Recovering from Religion has now established a hotline for people to call in and talk with an individual who can help them. Ex-Christian.net also has resources for people who have left Christianity. And there are many others.<br /><br />But what is our role as individuals? We cannot sit idly by while people are indoctrinated into believing that women are not the equals of men. If you are uncomfortable talking to religious people, get the new app Atheos. It is a guide to help people have “non-confrontational discussions about gods, religion, faith, and superstition.” Be open about your views. Every person needs a model to emulate. Remember the small African-American boy looking up to President Obama in the White House? He now knows marginalized people can be anything they want. Let’s all be models to show how great it can be to leave religion behind. And maybe someday elect a female president!<br /><br /><a href="http://faithlessfeminist.com/" target="_blank">The Faithless Feminist</a><br /><br /><span style="font-size: x-small;">[1] Karen Armstrong, The Great Transformation: The Beginning of our Religious Traditions (New York, NY: Knopf, 2006), 45.</span><br /><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span><span style="font-size: x-small;">[2] Leonard Shlain, The Alphabet Versus the Goddess: Male Words and Female Images (London, England: Penguin Press, 1998), 329.</span><br /><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span><span style="font-size: x-small;">[3] Karen L. Garst, Women Beyond Belief: Discovering Life without Religion (Durham, NC: Pitchstone Publishing, 2016), 30.</span>webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-77311463056538045982017-04-02T13:13:00.000-04:002017-04-30T17:31:40.984-04:00Get Your Priorities Right<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UPBX6Wik04s/WOExFPLxWOI/AAAAAAAAKwc/AOl_OfG3n5UcaNp5zQgKmgVU85abOOBEQCLcB/s1600/priorities.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="226" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UPBX6Wik04s/WOExFPLxWOI/AAAAAAAAKwc/AOl_OfG3n5UcaNp5zQgKmgVU85abOOBEQCLcB/s320/priorities.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">T</span>here's a reason I haven't been writing so much lately. I've gone back to building models. No, they aren't the ones in kit form. I built many of those over the decades. These are different. They're oldies, rail cars, the type once used as a “touring bus” of its day. I bought the plans for it ten years ago, and have been imaginatively modifying it ever since. Once, at a train show, I had one operating. A man was watching it run and asked me, “You modified that, didn't you?” It turned out he was the original designer. (Years later, I remembered the source of my inspiration: a magazine article about third world children creating their toys out of industrial products washed up on their beaches.)<br /><br />The wonderful thing about a hobby like this, as compared to writing about religious beliefs, is that I get a tangible result. Sure, there are responses to those commentaries, but they're not something I can hold in my hand, in three dimensions. There are perks in visualizing; even after it's finished, it has further possibilities. Plus, I've learned through trial and error, how to get desired results. You can even get satisfying results you hadn't planned. The problem about a hobby is, as a friend and I found out, the hobby can become obsessive, as you get involved in compulsive ideas of how to make your product more clever, satisfying, and functional. The hobby can take over your life, even to the point of neglecting the enjoyment of life itself, and to the extent of neglecting others you need to care about.<br /><br />It's all about creativity, isn't it? Creating entails overcoming obstacles. Without obstacles, there wouldn't be solutions, or satisfaction. From our experiences, we can see that a creator who could make something without any obstacles would find creating just too easy, definitely unsatisfying. There wouldn't be any difference between something he or she created and something which created itself. There's no fun in that. The biblical flood story is about a creation the creator found unsatisfying, so he destroyed it, like any frustrated animal tearing apart its structures. So he does it, and leaves it up to whoever, whatever, is left, to re-create it as best it can. And that's the story. It's an old story with Humanity: destroying in order to rebuild, to re-create.<br /><br />Without obstacles and challenges, there would be no pursuit of knowledge, no progress, and life itself would mean merely existing. For non-sentient beings, Nature doesn't work that way. Take, for examples, male bower birds, and all male birds, creating fanciful structures and plumage in order to mate, having the satisfaction of making something so attractive to the females that sexual gratification (usually) follows. Making babies is creative, and getting to that point means overcoming obstacles. So it goes with males of each species, whether we're citing their structures, bringing of gifts, showing off how strong they are, even looking and acting ridiculous, etc. But, whether male or female, we create for self-satisfaction, to impress others, or for pleasure. In doing so, we establish relationships. It's unavoidable.<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">Faiths and philosophies were built on the imaginations of those who wrote before them, who had more leisure time than work time.</span>What does a creative imagination have to do with religion, especially Christianity? Let's take the Gospels, for example. They're a collection of tales and teachings. Since most scriptural scholars assert “Mark” was the first written, because of its simplicity, those following were elaborations on it. What of religious tales and teachings before them? Faiths and philosophies were built on the imaginations of those who wrote before them, who had more leisure time than work time. (Others, affected by opioids and/or brain abnormalities, created their own.)<br /><br />You might say that philosophy and theology are really hobbies, open to vivid imaginations, while dealing with real and hypothetical problems. Each of them create a “what if ... therefore,” hypothesis. The difference between them is that each religion creates its own fictional reality, its own imaginary world separate from, yet acting on, the material world. It then makes its dogmas, and declares, “They're all absolutely true, therefore...” and tries to persuade or force humanity to agree.<br /><br />Religions are immaterial hobbies created by minds free from working, free at leisure to enjoy and ponder. Every religion becomes a hobby for its most serious followers, a product to feel superior about, an escapist pleasure of self-deception and persuasion that takes over the lives of clergy and their followers alike. The obsessive hobby of religious beliefs takes precedence over caring about others. (Indeed, as Jesus asserted, it must, and that includes one's own family members.) The shaman hobbyists of religion have to be psychologists, to be acutely aware of the fears, hopes, and vulnerabilities of their listeners, to exploit them. They use established methods to accomplish alleviating fears and bolstering hopes, and they have to be inventive building on them. It isn't enough they are steeped in the ancient art of persuasion and spin-doctoring dogmas. They must also be personally clever in order to survive and make their livings. Their hobby is entertainment with the satisfaction of being believed.<br /><br />For those who are still in religion, a warning: Let the hobby belong to you; not you to the hobby. After all, it's your human relationships that really matter. webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-4285587699598698982017-03-26T16:24:00.000-04:002017-04-16T13:09:00.350-04:00The Case for Declaring Secular Humanism a Religion<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-yrAngaLTpws/WNgjTbHIiiI/AAAAAAAAKvU/321zSWq8mGUSQcCACKhmexA60Vogjt_GACLcB/s1600/humanism.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-yrAngaLTpws/WNgjTbHIiiI/AAAAAAAAKvU/321zSWq8mGUSQcCACKhmexA60Vogjt_GACLcB/s320/humanism.jpg" width="277" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">M</span>aybe you haven't heard of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Loewy">Raymond Loewy</a>, the great American industrial designer. (There's an article about him in <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/01/what-makes-things-cool/508772/">Atlantic magazine Jan/Feb 2017</a>.) Loewy believed consumers are torn between two opposing forces: 1. a curiosity about new things, and 2. a fear of anything too new. He called his grand theory, “Most Advanced Yet Acceptable,” or, MAYA. He noted that people gravitate to products that are bold, but instantly comprehensible. Recently, Prof. Paul Hekkert of Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands, came to a similar conclusion: 1.” humans seek familiarity because it makes them feel safe, 2. “People are charged by the thrill of a challenge, powered by a pioneer lust. This battery between familiarity and discovery affects us on every level.”<br /><br />Hmm... Would this knowledge enable us to declare humanism a religion? After all, A. humanism is familiar – the majority of humans ascribe to humanist values; they are “instantly comprehensible.” B. reinterpreting humanism as a religion is an exciting challenge just waiting to be acceptable, being new, but not too new. It's bold and assertive and has a familiar social chutzpah, like the Declaration of Independence. Wouldn't it fill a need for a secular religion for all the “nones” in this world? Secular humanists oppose any hint of fellowship with the superstitions of religion, yet most members of those religions share their own versions of humanism. There is also a legal case for making such a claim: In the interest of equal rights under the First Amendment against the demands of all fundamentalism, we might consider the historical tradition of secular humanism as likewise, a religion.<br /><br />What we would require is a broad definition of what “religion” means. Dictionary definition of “religion”: A. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator or governor of the universe. B. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief. C. A cause or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.<br /><br />Doesn't ”religion” definition 'C' describe humanism? “The Affirmations of Humanism: A Statement of Principles,“ by The Council for Secular Humanism, or “The Humanist Manifesto” of American Humanists, fit that definition. We're so accustomed to religions defined as beliefs in a God or gods, as described in definitions 'A' and 'B' that we forget that Unitarianism, Scientology, and Buddhism have no God nor gods in them, though they are referred to as “religions.” Neither do all religions have churches, mosques, temples, etc. Some have fellowships and meeting-houses. Secular humanists have celebrants instead of clergy.<br /><br />What criteria does the U.S. Internal Revenue Service require to determine what definition of “religion” is legally acceptable for tax-exempt purposes? “The IRS makes no attempt to evaluate the content of whatever doctrine a particular organization claims is religious, provided the particular beliefs of the organization are truly and sincerely held by those professing them and the practices and rites associated with the organization's belief or creed are not illegal or contrary to clearly defined public policy.” There are additional qualifications, of which only some combinations are necessary. Of them, we may choose: “formal code of doctrine and discipline,” “membership not associated with any other church or denomination,” “ literature of its own,” and “ordained, commissioned or licensed ministers.” (We can understand the humanist rejection of the label “religion.” If these criteria are recognized by the IRS, then clubs of alien abduction members might, if they unified, qualify as a “religion.”)<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">Government-infiltrating Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists constantly attempt to coerce our secular government into handing them special exemptions to the laws of our country.</span>There is another, much more important reason to seek recognition of humanism as a secular religion than tax-exemption status: First Amendment rights. Government-infiltrating Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists constantly attempt to coerce our secular government into handing them special exemptions to the laws of our country. For example, they are trying to overrule our laws using the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” so that individual Christians and Christian organizations are free to act with prejudice in denying Constitutional rights to citizens. If humanism is recognized as a religion, members can declare, “We have rights, too, as do those Christians who disagree with us, and they are stepping on our rights.” (Even though those rights are “unalienable,” we still need to fight like hell to keep them.)<br /><br />Would “the Nones” be willing to sign on to humanism as a secular religion? The majority of humans already ascribe to humanistic values. (To quote Annie Laurie Gaylor of FFRF, “Most Americans live their lives like atheists.”) Aren't those who are out protesting, with marches, rallies, blocking entrances to traffic/streets, and shouting down the promoters of hatred and bigotry, essentially humanists?<br /><br />America's Declaration of Independence asserts each individual person is, “endowed with certain 'unalienable ' Rights, among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” That “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the governed.” Not some deity. Isn't the word “unalienable” comparable to “sacrosanct?” This United States is not a “Christian nation,” but is founded on, lives, and has made its great social progress, through humanistic values and beliefs. These are of, by, and for, the People. Secular humanism needs to be legally recognized as a religion, as an established credo for humanity, the finest “cause and activity pursued with zeal and conscientious devotion.” Most Americans will be agreeable, “pursued by the thrill of the challenge.” webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-70594706514612377102017-03-26T16:17:00.000-04:002017-04-16T13:09:00.354-04:00God is Sin<i>By FoundationOfUnity ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-78vMSz-Cqh0/WNghsEFA9OI/AAAAAAAAKvI/QTPWzlDkzC0Rh0gHmb17_ATYUOw9SuctACLcB/s1600/tyrant.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="112" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-78vMSz-Cqh0/WNghsEFA9OI/AAAAAAAAKvI/QTPWzlDkzC0Rh0gHmb17_ATYUOw9SuctACLcB/s320/tyrant.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">G</span>reetings. I hope each of us can help others reach the level of life experience they deserve as humans and will earn through hard work toward their goals. I speak to myself as well. I am a scientific life coach so goals are central to my work. I was once a pastor in the Assemblies of God, Nationally Appointed Home Missions Chaplain, and Director of a spiritual care Department in a larger New York State Hospice. I was a pastor to the master and thought it was just his servants running things on earth that was the problem. Instead, it was the master himself. I really can't blame god, he just doesn't exist so...such futility only hurts me by dissipating my energy. And what energy it requires to either blame him or tame him. He is on sickening virus of the mind. <br /><br />From the charismatic, tongues speaking, fasting, praying preaching eating meditating life in leading a community of people lobotomized by god it become clear that there was or must be another way. My real saving grace had nothing at all to do with a blood soaked book club or post that fueled a blood soaked grounds among nations for the next 20 centuries. It had nothing to do with a god who does not exist in any meaningful way that some other less magical fantasy could not easily fulfill. My grace that saved myself was desire for the best for humanity regardless of any other factor, even regardless of god and regardless of Jesus. It was also for the best for me.<br /><br />While I did come from a rather emotionally barren experience growing up, and while I was fully aware of this lack, I and my new wife ran into Jesus people. For the first time I met people with a global vision of peace and power and an answer. Jesus. The world had problems because of sin and sinful behavior. Yep! I agreed. Lots of murdering warriors (Vietnam), lying politicians, and violence everywhere along with laws that just seemed out of control. Teachers had only reading writing and arithmetic but no real understanding of life. Now, they told me Jesus knew everything, the bible was absolutely true in every way, and to cap it off…I was the problem.<br /><br />Ah, turning the tables and both barrels on me. I admitted I wanted to be better and have a great life. “Well, there you go…sinner.” They said…”on your knees.” Eventually I capitulated. I had entry to the cult of Christian faith. Twenty-four years, two children, an ordination, and top experience, it was solidly clear, I’d been had by others who “had been had.”<br /><br />My kids are grown but still trapped. They do enjoy it. My former wife told me once she is no longer religious. Good for her! Freedom is lovely and freedom requires reality, not fantasy god-ball. What follows is the result of continued education and search for real reconciliation. It follows advanced degrees from top universities in business (MBA), politics (MILR), human development (MA) and human and organizational systems (PhD). Let’s start.<br /><br />God is sin. Let it sink in. How do I know this is true? I know this by the definition of sin and its relationship to god. Without god, sin could not exist for sin is the transgression of god’s law. No god means there is no god’s law. Since there is no law of god, there can be no sin. Crime is not sin and crime does exist. Crime is the transgression of human law but crime is not sin. Sin is crime in such a level that only god is strong enough to kill, maim, hate and eradicate it. Thankfully, neither god nor sin exist.<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">Sin is crime in such a level that only god is strong enough to kill, maim, hate and eradicate it. Thankfully, neither god nor sin exist.</span>Many crimes are also sins because god copied human law and natural law. God takes all natural things and claims all of them for his supremacist ego. Crime is man’s law. How laws are enforced are different in different cultures. Criminal law is a work in progress and nations without god law are more humane, loving, and successful than those with sin or god-based law. To god, this truth is blasphemy. Not only is god sin but god's truth is blasphemy to humanity. <br /><br />Sin is the evil of god. With sin, god works horrendous and hideous mayhem in any group that adopts this concept. The threat of death and destruction brings fear and paranoia into any group. Fear and paranoia causes hysteria and hateful acts toward those who transgress god-law. Not only are transgressor judged, shunned, economically harmed, and eventually killed or exiled, they must also live lives of hiding and lying to survive. All because of a god who does not exist and has never done any of the things the bible claims.<br /><br />This god who created sin is the worst of leaders and most un American or un-free leader possible in terms of law. God is immoral and that I will explain in another, perhaps the next, post. This god, now referred to as “clod” whenever possible, is the judge of sin, the jury of the sinner and the executioner. Clod brings hell and sometimes, immediate punishment. No one on earth need put up with clod’s immoral and destructive personality. Clod is a liar, a murderer, a thief, and quite insane. But clod, like a child beating drunken parent, begs for children to stay under his roof because clod loves us. All we are asked for repeatedly are strict obedience and offerings in addition to 10% of our income.<br /><br />I do pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, not united by god and not with liberty and justice for all because of god.webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-16711180731302687612017-03-26T16:10:00.001-04:002017-04-16T13:09:00.344-04:00Fake News vs. Absolute Truth<i>By Burny ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-mchMNjMfjao/WNggKzMt4vI/AAAAAAAAKvA/YXsMMkeqLGgyuNmxR73ghpH5iomyomGXQCLcB/s1600/fakenews.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="149" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-mchMNjMfjao/WNggKzMt4vI/AAAAAAAAKvA/YXsMMkeqLGgyuNmxR73ghpH5iomyomGXQCLcB/s320/fakenews.JPG" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">I</span> saw this silly quote on a Christian's timeline the other day;<br /><br /><blockquote><a href="https://twitter.com/njorogejm/status/837151773156593664" target="_blank">If there is no absolute truth, there is no fake news</a>.</blockquote><br />Once again, a cute quote sounds profound until we examine it a bit closer. First of all, Skeptics don't assume that there are no absolute truth(s). We assert, humbly, that absolute truths are very difficult to find and even more difficult to prove. In order to prove something is absolutely true, we must be able to prove all other options false, and this is nigh impossible from a logical and mathematical perspective.<br /><br />Let me give a simple example.<br /><br />In order to prove that the Christian God is absolutely true (he's the only real one), we must first prove that all other God's that people believe in don't exist and that all other miracles, holy books and holy people are wrong about their beliefs while Christians are correct about theirs.<br /><br />But it gets much harder than that!<br /><br />We also have to prove that all versions of there being *no* Gods are false, and that all combinations of there being possible Gods - even in all other possible universes - are false. The only way to do this is to know everything about everything in every possible universe.<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">I understand that relativism, and the idea that absolute truth claims are almost impossible to test, is a very difficult pill for most Christians to swallow but that's just the way it is.</span>I don't know everything. Do you?<br /><br />On the other hand, falsifying just one claim is relatively easy. Simply take the claim (news story) and research whether it bears out in reality (test its claims). If it checks out then it's likely not fake news, but if it's claim isn't verifiable than it's likely fake. That isn't very hard to do, is it? Certainly not as hard as finding an absolute truth!<br /><br />Do you see the important difference between the two? I understand that relativism, and the idea that absolute truth claims are almost impossible to test, is a very difficult pill for most Christians to swallow but that's just the way it is. I've had many discussions with Christians and this is the hardest thing they deal with internally. There is no way to know for sure that they are right and I am wrong. This is simply the way the logic works out - and a few honest Christians have admitted this to me. In the end, a Christian only has their faith (not facts) to give them great confidence that they have stumbled on the one truth.<br /><br />Truth is hard. Fake is easy. Can you honestly say you know for sure why you're right and I'm wrong?<br /><br />webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-56567458772708659942017-03-19T15:14:00.005-04:002017-04-02T13:30:40.423-04:00April Fool!<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ywguuIgXE_Y/WM7YX9xHaCI/AAAAAAAAKuc/yFRrig2ayiIC3hnUQTuZjsAL617DuAW5QCEw/s1600/april%2Bfools.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="309" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ywguuIgXE_Y/WM7YX9xHaCI/AAAAAAAAKuc/yFRrig2ayiIC3hnUQTuZjsAL617DuAW5QCEw/s320/april%2Bfools.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">Y</span>ou go to the vineyard and sign in at 6 a.m. You start work right away. Others come in and begin at 9, at noon, and four p.m. At the end of the day, you all get paid the same. The boss tells you take it or leave it.<br /><br />You work your way up the business ladder expecting promotions. Then, one day you overhear, “In my rules, the last shall be first, and the first shall be last.” Little did you suspect such prejudice.<br /><br />You consult a charismatic wise man respected as a god, who advises you to handle violence directed at you thusly: If someone hits you in the jaw, turn your face so he can hit you from another angle, and if he steals your coat off your back, don't neglect to give him your shirt, too. Forgive the guy who rapes your daughter.<br /><br />You've been a really good son; you've done everything to earn your father's respect, and nothing to cause him the slightest embarrassment. Are you recognized for this? Your lazy brother, whose gone off and spent his inheritance on drinking, drugging, whoring, and carousing, comes home, and your father welcomes him with open arms, and rewards him for returning, with a fabulous banquet.<br /><br />You go back to consult the wise man. He tells you to make no plans for the future. His father will take care of everything. Okay. So, you don't set aside money for retirement. No IRA nor social security for you. You trust in him, have faith. On his advice, you sell everything you have and give it away to the needy. Uh-huh.<br /><br />How far will you go trusting him and his promises of eternal bliss? What sacrifices are you willing to make? Your life, your spouse's, your children's? He tells you if your sexual urges bother you, cut off your sex organs, if you see “evil” things with your eye, pluck it out, and if you're tempted to steal, cut off your hand .He tells you it's better off going into a heaven without a hand, castrated or eyeless, than not getting in otherwise. He uses your hand to slap you and asks, “Why are you hurting yourself?”<br /><br />He's got you convinced to assault your mind every time you look on a woman with lust in your heart. You give him your absolute trust. He insists, to save your life, you must lose it. He convinces you that all your heart’s desires will be given to you, but first you have to die. You won't get those desires until after you're dead. And the best way to emulate your hero is by forcing others to kill you.<br /><br />You allow others to decide for you what the meaning of your life is, what you must believe, the choices and decisions for your own life and death. And after you've done all this and you're dead, guess what? Ultimate April Fool!!webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-38021899533729232892017-03-12T15:22:00.002-04:002017-03-26T17:10:36.051-04:00 Nausea<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Sn1uLvBnXZ0/WMWf_IyoIuI/AAAAAAAAKtw/wQRXL2w7T142eI1lLJVU9cdU-RlAjs0KwCLcB/s1600/nausea.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Sn1uLvBnXZ0/WMWf_IyoIuI/AAAAAAAAKtw/wQRXL2w7T142eI1lLJVU9cdU-RlAjs0KwCLcB/s1600/nausea.jpg" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">J</span>anuary of 2017 was one of those periods most of us would prefer to forget. My wife and I spent most of the month suffering from a viral siege most likely picked up from her congregation, since its entire membership came down with it at the same time. I count myself as “collateral damage.” To make matters worse, the 20th brought It's Mourning in America.<br /><br />Illness puts one in what my ex called “a different world,” that healthy people can't approach. Well-meaning people will phone to ask you, “How are you doing?” while they really don't care to hear the details, and I don't blame them. And their prayers may make them feel they're helping, but prayers are the cheapest gift they can give. That's why some bring food, or offer to do errands for you. Feeling as rotten as I did, what was merely annoying became severely aggravating. Just leave me alone! For this reason, I tuned out the talking head opinions masking as news. With that sickness, I lived with the continuous nausea that comes and goes with varying degrees of intensity. Although, out of that war, other nausea continues.<br /><br />Nausea: 1. “a feeling of sickness in the stomach marked by an urge to vomit.” 2. “strong aversion or disgust.” We've all experienced these. Here's my example of them occurring simultaneously. If I'm in the hospital and a clergy member shows up in my room. I might just be nauseated enough to vomit on him. As it is, the presence of a clergy member naturally inclines me that way. This reaction is involuntary.<br /><br />Before internet dating sites, there were “personals.” I had one in the local paper. There were several responses on the call-in number, one of them beginning, “My name's … I'm a Christian woman.” After our first meeting, I told her I was not a believer, and she assured me this wouldn't be a problem for her. We married a few months later. I attended Sunday services with her. Because I'm hearing-impaired, I didn't hear the sermons, and the music was okay. There came a time when I just couldn’t handle that scene anymore. For weeks, I thought of how I would tell her, so that when I did, I figured on being carefully prepared. In spite of this, she said she thought I had been deceiving her by attending church. My explanation was that I went because I love her, but that lately, going to church services “make me physically sick.” She reluctantly accepted this. My non-attendance since then is permanent. We're still happy, and it's coming on to 22 years together.<br /><br />At this point, you can imagine the believer saying, “You're a strange one, Mister Grinch. You've got it backwards. Everyone knows the polls show regular church attendees are emotionally healthier, happier, and more content with their lives than non-believers.” Well, I have to admit, if someone who claims to be a believer thinks he's expected to say these things to a pollster, he'd say those things. In a recent conversation, another non-believer pointed out the fact we are fortunate in not having the fears they do. That's a big plus.<br /><br />Do believers accuse me of being bitter/angry at a God that I tell them doesn't exist to bother about? That really is their problem. If their god or his salesmen make me nauseous or want to vomit, why, that's a reaction to poisons and noxious atmospheres. I've wondered how people can go about living with poisons in their systems without being aware of them or not noticed by others. We get used to accepting things as we see them. This reminds me of an electrician I knew for many years. One day, he asked if I noticed he had lost a lot of weight. It was obvious. He had to have an operation. His “overweight” was a tumor.<br /><br />Since I've been outside the confines of church, I've found myself disgusted with what goes on within them: the denials, lies and half-truths, the delusional thinking, hypocrisy, exploitation of emotions, constant requests for money. But most of all, I abhor the elevation of ignorance to sacredness. I've been un-Christianly healthy for decades. (In my first marriage, my then-wife thought I should be seeing a psychiatrist, I went to three of them over the years. Each concluded, in non-technical terms: “what the hell are you wasting my time for?” How many of my atheist friends have that w/o god experience?)<br /><br />Why are there churches? I have a theory. Houses of worship have popularity in common with gambling casinos, game shows, and concert performances. They're isolated from the world outside and set up to be intensely focused on gaining specific rewards and responses. Those within are just as ready to give themselves up, let themselves go, as if they were mindlessly diving into sexual intercourse. What power can reason and truth have against such forces? A church environment adds to these factors an assumption that whatever happens in it speaks of unquestionable truth. Such sweet poison, this antifreeze of faith. Some vomit it up, and feel well. Unless they want to be like a dog returning to eat it.<br /><br />Maybe there'll come a day when most people are made nauseous by religions. At the present time, I feel I'm far from being in the minority. Whatever. I live, love, laugh often, get pissed off, spread friendship and get out, and out of myself. Funny thing though: no pollster asks me about happiness. <span class="pullquote"></span>webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-64100127680012575312017-03-12T15:17:00.001-04:002017-03-26T17:13:10.274-04:00The Odds of being Right<i>By Burny ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7-S8HlqM98s/WMWeqTIc9NI/AAAAAAAAKto/B6vsxgOs5HkyfqEB6OKfIo7Aq4OnHulHACLcB/s1600/WhatAreTheOdds_Main-300x168.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="179" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7-S8HlqM98s/WMWeqTIc9NI/AAAAAAAAKto/B6vsxgOs5HkyfqEB6OKfIo7Aq4OnHulHACLcB/s320/WhatAreTheOdds_Main-300x168.png" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">S</span>omething I've heard a lot from Christians again lately, is the idea that since we can't really know who's right and who's wrong about God vs. no God, their opinion is just as valid and likely to be true as someone like me who doesn't believe in God. This argument is a sort of Pascal's Wager which has been dealt with before on this site, but a more subtle version of it which demands a simple illustration to show why this argument is too simplistic and doesn't make sense mathematically speaking.<br /><br />Let's say there are 4200 world religions today. Of course, you assume that only 1 of those 4200 views is the correct way to view God and reality - that is Christianity. The way a lot of Christians talk is that they assume that Atheism is simply another religious point of view, i.e. there are 4201 differing opinions and 4201 options - one of which MUST be correct. This is an incorrect way of using statistics and I can illustrate this with an example using colored marbles.<br /><br />Let's take the 4200 world religions and represent them with colored marbles - say they're all slightly different shades of gray. I'll even go one step further and let's assume 4199 of them are grey tones and 1 of them (i.e. Christianity) is navy blue. Atheism isn't represented by one additional marble - say a white one - it's represented by an infinite number of slightly different shades of white marbles. Atheists don't believe that that the complete absence of God(s) is the only statistical option left next to the 4200 defined religions of the world today.<br /><br />An honest Atheist has to admit that there are an infinite number of other possibilities - slight nuances of every single option possible, including the 4200 current world religions, all the historical world religious beliefs and also an infinite number of other ones. Simply put - nobody can know the real truth until we know everything that there is to know about anything - and this leaves us with an infinite number of possible truths - albeit some very unlikely options such as unicorns, Santa Claus and flying reindeer! It is impossible to prove that garden gnomes don't exist without first proving everything else both in and without our universe and showing that garden gnomes aren't anywhere. This applies across the board and includes Jesus, Zeus, Thor and every God that's ever been worshiped.<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">Nobody can know the real truth until we know everything that there is to know about anything</span>The way an Atheist views reality and the odds of Christianity being the one truth can be thought of as dumping all the marbles (4199 shades of gray, 1 blue and an infinite number of slightly different shades of white) into a huge bucket and blindly choosing just one of them. When the marble that was chosen is viewed, it just happens to be the blue one. <br /><br />The mathematical odds of a random choice resulting in the one blue marble, out of an infinite number of other options are zero, and this is the position of an atheist when it comes to Christianity being the one truth. No matter how correct you might think you are. No matter how smart and reasoned you might think your position is. No matter how right you feel you are. No matter how many personal prayers you think your God has personally answered, the sheer statistical odds of you being correct amongst an infinite number of alternate possibilities are ZERO.<br /><br />It's that simple for Atheists. Even Christians believe this, which is why you feel so lucky to be saved! You know that the odds that you just happened to be born into the ONE correct interpretation of Christianity and the ONE correct world religion are astronomically small. The only difference between you and I is that you call it a miracle and I call it impossible.webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-4874201303751341862017-03-12T14:51:00.000-04:002017-03-26T17:10:36.056-04:00Different Worlds<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OaA_TVVR8l8/WMWYh2EBFHI/AAAAAAAAKtE/UJkoUANuJGY67y22ocV8bnoIMPWKnIJZACLcB/s1600/mature-couple-having-coffee-using-phones.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OaA_TVVR8l8/WMWYh2EBFHI/AAAAAAAAKtE/UJkoUANuJGY67y22ocV8bnoIMPWKnIJZACLcB/s1600/mature-couple-having-coffee-using-phones.jpg" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">R</span>ay Bradbury's novel, “Fahrenheit 451” is famous for it's message of resistance to a government's suppression of free speech through the burning of books. His society has accepted this suppression as “normal.” Beneath the story of the fireman book-burner who becomes the book-preserver, lies another: his resignation to the “normal” relationship with his wife. During the course of his experiences, we come to see how each of them lives in differing worlds. The world is dramatically changing before him, while his wife's remains the same, every day.<br /><br />Perhaps the author is commenting on spousal relationships in general. Normally, marriage relationships might begin in passionate “cannot live without/we're soul-mates “ confessions, but eventually, each spouse wants his and her own personal space, interests, hobbies, activities, etc. They remain emotionally attached, committed, and physically involved enough to feel secure and comfortable together. You might say this pattern is “traditional.” (One man wrote about reading while his wife watched tv, thinking how his father read the newspaper while his mother crocheted and listened to the radio. Before then, did the husband whittle or carve while his wife knitted or made jams?) As I sit here writing, the laptop on my lap, she's watching a program of interviews with members of yet one more dysfunctional family, who will exit the audience most likely unchanged by unloading their problems.<br /><br />The theme of “relationships together but not,” is taken to the extreme in Bradbury's tale. The hero's wife is emotionally involved with her television “family,” which consists of a few people sitting around in discussions not revealed to us. She is literally surrounded with them, since her television is a total environment, covering all four walls of her room, totally uninvolved in any other world, especially his.<br /><br />Some realists are lovingly married to Christian spouses, so they have inkling where I'm going with this. (If you are not a religious person, you might also empathize with another husband, the spouse of a woman involved with her son's evangelical preaching fervor, in Joyce Carol Oates novel, “Son of the Morning.” ) Don't we sometimes feel our spouses are living in a world not of a TV “family” but a church “family” separate from reality? Do these “families” they belong to deeply believe superstitions are necessary for human survival, just as willingly sacrificing children to the gods once was? Do they fear to let go of their superstitions for that reason? It might be something you need to discuss with others, if this is their belief and our predicament.<br /><br />Sometimes our social relationships are more galactic than organic. We are in our own orbits, coming together to share the best and worst of times, which happen to be the ones we remember most strongly. But those “soul” or “spiritual” connections are transitory and subject to re-thinking. We return to those comfortable orbits again. Like little children, we take the opportunity to jump on the lap for our hugging and loving, but jump off quickly - we've had enough to last us until the next time.<br /><br />At times, it looks like we're living in a multiple personality disorder society, each racial, ethical, cultural, and status-conscious strata contrasted with the other. As in marriages, compromise is the proven method to keep things from colliding in disorder. In any democracy, shared, factual, and verified information should lead to more tolerance and compromise in order for our social organism to survive. Ideological political-religious movements keep getting in the way. It is a curse inborn to all religions: they are ever discontent to stay in their own orbits, which are inherently unstable and founded on the shifting sand of invented traditions. Refusing to look inward, they force themselves outward. How do you communicate with and get past the fears of those who live in another world?webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-758296263141032902017-03-05T15:39:00.000-05:002017-03-12T15:26:40.461-04:00Idealism Poisons Everything<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CD-NgT3UDs4/WLx23P-33BI/AAAAAAAAKsA/bGiVRcABOZ8r2-KUku26h1so8Dc8cZQvQCLcB/s1600/idealism.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CD-NgT3UDs4/WLx23P-33BI/AAAAAAAAKsA/bGiVRcABOZ8r2-KUku26h1so8Dc8cZQvQCLcB/s320/idealism.jpg" width="256" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">I</span> have a friend who informed me he doesn't like to look in the mirror. Here I thought I was the only one. We don't like our looks; what I see there doesn't look like me. How do I see myself? I can't answer that. Does knowing that “appearances can be deceiving” have anything to do with this? After all, police interrogators report looking into the eyes of psychotic killers and seeing “nothing” there. I remember when I was single, talking to a woman on the phone for at least ninety minutes. She was anxious to meet up with me, so we agreed on a place. Well, she came in, took one look at me, and left. Other women told me I've got pleasant looks. Each to her own, I guess. Hasn't changed my “lack” of self image anymore than my “lack” of faith.<br /><br />As a boy, I listened to Jack Benny on the radio. Eventually, when I saw him on television, his voice didn't fit his face. To this day, I break out in laughter whenever I hear of someone seeing Jesus or his mother. Where is this, on paintings? (And obviously, those who tell us Jesus was a “perfect” man haven't paid attention to their gospels.) What about body image? I'll bet there are millions of women and men dieting and exercising to achieve perfect bodies, discontent with the ones they have.<br /><br /><span class="pullquote">Epicurus, who in the fourth century B.C., said that with a new body, “You” would not be “you” anymore.</span>There's a fascinating Atlantic magazine article of Sept. 2016. A Russian man, last name Piradonov, awaits a surgical operation involving transplanting his head on a healthy body. To him, any healthy body is ideal. After such an operation, wouldn't the potentially disastrous mind-body consequences alone be frightening, if not terrifying? And speaking of bizarre: people have believed for centuries they will be given new bodies to “inhabit” after they die! This despite the words of Epicurus, who in the fourth century B.C., said that with a new body, “You” would not be “you” anymore. This is an uncomfortable future, thus, believers reject it, and, in their magical thinking, their act of rejection means what they prefer to be true is true. After all, Faith consists in believing, despite... (Notice: this viral religious creed of preference, ergo rejection, is currently infecting the American electorate in epic proportions.)<br /><br />The subtitle of Christopher Hitchen's book, ”god Is Not Great,” is, “How Religion Poisons Everything.” At first, you might be inclined to respond, “Nah!” to that. Religion preaches ideal futures: paradise, heaven, and even a hell ideally created for those the religious hate most. Religion is ultimate idealism, offering access to and experiences of a superior spiritual realm existing outside reality. The pursuit of those experiences poisons everything in living.<br /><br />Creating “ideal” societies through religious and/or political movements have resulted in the suffering and deaths of millions. Thomas More, the author of “Utopia,” tortured and burned heretics. The methodologies used to create ideal societies have originated in communism, Islamic State, Zionism, fascism, Nazism, inquisitions, and even, the overblown ideals of democracies. The ongoing wars to create ideal Christian-political or Sharia law-political states is perpetual. Idealized movements to create heavens on earth have resulted in hells on earth.<br /><br />And yet, humans continue to believe in ideals. Nature doesn't function that way; the natural world has no beliefs, but only effects. Via the evolutionary methods of chance and natural selection, nature uses whatever each organism, including your own body, already possesses, to adapt to its needs in an environment. Whatever works is good enough. Humans aren't content with that system when it applies to their dealings living as part of nature. But first, they have to work with nature, then they've been able to manipulate its systems. Typically, there has always been something god-like about this, leading to the tempting conceit of believing humans are exempt in profound ways from the laws of nature. Thus, they believe they will someday live forever.<br /><br />What's so dangerous about the “ideal” or “perfect” is that those terms are ambiguous and subjective. Every year, a magazine claims “the world's most perfect man,” yet many women would think him so-so, while others would be turned off, especially if he is found to be a misogynist. Years ago, one major magazine printed a photo composite of a woman created by combining the most beautiful features of individual women. The result was a very plain individual. It is in contrasts, and not combinations of beauty, that we truly see beauty. The beauty of a U. S. constitution lies in its ability to adapt to imperfect societies, agents, and laws which are open to unpredictable changes over time. “Good enough” works. It's healthy. Idealism poisons. webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1266985040290242663.post-71987057390276104472017-02-19T09:31:00.001-05:002017-03-12T15:28:30.349-04:00Deny, Deny, Deny<i>By Carl S ~ </i><br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nRrnomqkV3s/WKmsQRJo7nI/AAAAAAAAKq4/M161G9MF6WEa6M-D7AQWO2BNaVqyuo8eQCLcB/s1600/RealityChangedMyLife.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="254" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nRrnomqkV3s/WKmsQRJo7nI/AAAAAAAAKq4/M161G9MF6WEa6M-D7AQWO2BNaVqyuo8eQCLcB/s320/RealityChangedMyLife.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="dropcap">A</span> few days ago, I purchased a fascinating book, <a href="http://amzn.to/2l9qHUG">“Leningrad: Siege and Symphony,” by Brian Moynahan</a>. Since I'm very familiar with the “Leningrad Symphony,” as well as the siege of Stalingrad, the title grabbed my attention. If you are still a believer in God or prayer, you will be totally unprepared for the historical facts and first-person testimonies in this book. If you still believe in God and the power of prayer by page 200, you're totally in denial. Of the many lessons learned from Leningrad, both long before and during the siege: there is no God. (BTY: the question, “Does prayer work?” is moot, if one claims to believe in a caring God. Prayer will not be necessary if there were.)<br /><br />Does truth matter? America's Trump administration has used a term, “alternate facts,” as an explanation for its claims. This is just another way of saying “lies” in Trump's “Orwellian 1984” political doubletalk. His press secretary explained Trump's “facts” as “what he believes.” In this context, consider this: The destruction and loss of millions of lives, as detailed in Mr. Moyhahan’s book and infinite documentaries, are the results of Hitler's and Stalin's “beliefs.”<br /><br />If the fundamentalists picked this guy for a spokesman, since they want to create their Christian nation, they got the right man. He, like them, only accepts what he prefers to believe is true. Will his, therefore theirs, be the repressive “alternative world” we'll be forced to live in? Give them an inch...<br /><br />Religious claims to truth have always been “alternative facts.” That's a fact. Man, am I familiar with “alternative” facts/truths! Organizations like Focus on the Family, Priests for Life, the ACLJ, a movement to “drive Planned Parenthood off campuses,” the Jesus Camps and Good News clubs, those claiming to make gays straight though prayer etc., etc, send me their appeals for money, based on their “alternative facts.” Their “facts” are, of course, lies; most obviously when they cite disproven claims to support them. (Naturally, we'll include those who want creationism taught in public schools as an “alternative fact” to the truths of evolution. They're all in denial.<br /><br />Aren't our present persistent movement of denials under religious/political systems based on fear? Doesn't the denial of reality have a religious undertow of fearing to doubt beliefs, coupled with the fear that doubt will lead to horrible consequences? Wouldn't the denial of that fear alone explain the desire for “alternative facts” and many false news claims? Those who have deeply entrenched and unconscious, unspoken, fears react by denying. Both fear and paranoia create faith in religious and political saviors. This is an omen. Allowing the emotion of fear to overcome reason and compassion leads to acceptance of irrational and inhumane religious/political “alternative truths,” and drags us all down. This is our, and the world's by extension, present predicament.<br /><br />Fears which drive denials must create their own alternative realities. Studies have shown: reality is not just objective, but subjective to individuals. Under extreme stress, such as the siege of Leningrad, it's understandable that a person would be in denial and create a fantasy alternative world to deal with the never-ending nightmare realities of every day. It is understandable, under those circumstances, why some would grasp, cling to, the straws of fantasies created by others. But what's the reason simple ordinary circumstances lead people to prefer fantasies and lies to accepting realities? Is it just because they don't want to deal with them? Denial won't make reality go away; substitutes have even become, well, deadly.<br /><br />And yet there is another kind of denial which I found in reading this book: the denial of Leningrad's musicians to allow repression, starvation, and even death itself, to overcome their humanity. Members of an atheistic society understood music as a response to despair, a living in the moment in the pleasure, the sadness, nostalgia, hope and comfort of music, in their world gone insane. Music is used by every army for these reasons; not simply for entertainment or encouragement to fight.<br /><br />Shouldn't we encourage music-making to destroy religious superstitions and other irrationalities as a worthy enterprise? There is pleasure exploded through freedom of expression, in destroying “sacred” idols with sarcasm, irony and ridicule, using music. The composer of the “Leningrad” symphony, (his 7th), was Dimitri Shostakovich, and he was a master at it. His methodical music was a means of protesting and undermining the repressions of totalitarian systems.<br /><br />Isn't the use of music itself an answer religions employ (with extraneous dogmas attached of course), to deny empowerment to fears, their own self-created fears included, and despair? The difference between the religious reaction and the answer from the atheist musicians of Leningrad is that music in itself is an affirmation of life. Leningrad poet Olga Beggolt wrote, “But those who sent us so much death miscalculated. They underestimated our voracious hunger for life.” These words from an atheist are profound compared to the finality of death denials, the vacuous nonsense of “better place now” of the superstitious. Olga understood. <span class="pullquote"></span>webmdavenoreply@blogger.com0